SH 361 

* t M 


1 


> 


^H'Sf^^^^HI 




1916 


K 


.: 


.: 


:;: 




■■-• 








4> .>■■- 



-^^ .^ '^is-, -v,.^" .-. 






. o " " " * '^O A 



'^.. .<^ /aI:;^^*^. -^^^^ . 







<i ' . - 5 * ^A. 






-^ O^ -'i^'^i^ 



^°-V, 












' .>^ 



5^' 






-" . -^^ 




















O V . : 











<*. 





^'- u ^^ ^^^-^ 




4 o 







J." v>>- «, »■ . ^ ?< • -Vj. A 





0^ s ' • • 












'b *vT.T^ A 







<. "•'' ^' 






O > 





5» <- " 









<S> O M O 



4^ 



" ,-?) 



^^ 



^<!- 



4 0, 



FUR SEAL INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA 
HEARINGS 

BEFORE A 

SUBCOMMITTEE OF 
THE COMMITTEE ON CLAIMS 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

SIXTY-FOURTH CONGRESS 
First Session 

ON THE 

JOINT RESOLUTION PROVIDING FOR PAYMENT FOR 

I SERVICES RENDERED IN THE FUR SEAL 

INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA 



• FEBRUARY 23 and 24, 1916 




WASHINGTON 

GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 

1916 



^J 






Vo 



D. of p. 
JUN 17 1916 



FUR SEAL INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA. 



Subcommittee of the Committee ox Claims, 

House of Representatives, 
Tuesday^ Fehruary 23, 1915. 
The subcommittee met at 10.30 o'clock a. m., Hon. Hubert D. 
Stephens presiding. 

There were present before the subcommittee Hon. John H. Rother- 
mel, a Member of Congress from the State of Pennsylvania ; Hon. 
John H. Stephens, a Member of Congress from the State of Texas; 
Mr. Henry ^\. Elliott; and Mr. Andrew F. Gallagher. 

Mr. Stephens of Mississippi. Gentlemen, this hearing is on a joint 
resolution introduced by Mr. Stephens of Texas, providing for the 
payment of certain sums of money to Henry W. Elliott and Andrew 
F. Gallagher for services rendered in regard to the fur-seal investiga- 
tion in Alaska, made by the Committee on Expenditures in the De- 
partment of Commerce. 

Now, Mr. Elliott, we will hear from you first in regard to this 
matter. 

STATEMENT OF MR. HENRY W. ELLIOTT. 

(The witness was duly sworn by Mr. Stephens of Mississippi.) 
Mr. Elliott. Mr. Chairman and gentlemen of the committee, on 
the 20th of last June the Committee on Expenditures in the Depart- 
ment of Commerce were in possession of the fact that if an agent of 
that committee could reach the seal islands without publicity he 
would be able to get for the use of the committee and the Attorney 
General certain evidence which was necessary to enable the Govern- 
ment to successfully prosecute the lessees of these islands and recover 
from them several million dollars- of which the said lessees had 
robbed the Government during the interval of their lease, from 1891 
to 1910, inclusive. The fact that the Government had been robbed 
had been developed in previous hearings of that committee begin- 
ning May 31. 1911, and closing July 30, 1912. These hearings de- 
veloped the fact that these lessees had killed more than 128,000 seals, 
which were specifically accounted for, in violation of the law. But 
the full proof, the physical evidence of that fraud, was lacking, and 
it was necessarv for the committee to have that full proof in order 
to strengthen the case in the hands of the Attorney General. 

On that day, the 20th of June, 1913. the committee having these 
facts in its possession and the House being without a quorum— meet- 
ing day by day by a " gentleman's agreement " not to come together 
for a quorum until the 14th of July— the chairman of the committee, 
Mr. Rothermel, asked me if I could go up there as an agent of the 



I 



4 FUR SEAL INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA. 

committee and secure that prooof. I told him that if 1 went up 
without publicity, without any advertising of my errand I could get 
the skins and more than likely I could also get the proof from the 
journals of the killing which had been done, and of which sworn 
testimony had been taken. I outlined these facts to him. and he said 
that he believed it was proper for the committee to send us up; that 
he Avould call the committee together and they would consider it. 
The committee was called to meet that day. 

]Mr. STEriiExs of Texas. Would it not l)e well to suggest at this 
point that we had hearings on this matter before and the connuittee 
was in possession of the facts outside of these statements that you 
refer to, and you were sent up there to get the evidence to verify 
those facts? 

Mr. Elliott. Yes; I am coming to that. I am speaking now of 
the fact which caused me to be brought in. 

The committee met on the 20th of June, 1913. and on motion of 
Hon. John T. Watkins the following resolution was adopted : 

Ordered, That Henry W. Elliott is hereby appointed as a duly qualified expert 
to gather certain information touchinp; the conduct of public affairs on the seal 
islands of Alaska as the chairman of the connuittee shall require, and that 
Andrew F. Gallagher is hereby appointed as a duly qualified expert Stenographer 
and notary to accompany Mr. Elliott and record the details of that information 
as it shall be developed under the instructions of the chairman. 

Mr. Stephens of Mississippi. Let me ask you, Mr. Elliott, are all 
the salient facts that you propose to present to us now set out in 
writing there ? 

Mr. Elliott. They are in here ; yes. 

Mr. Stephens of Mississippi. If so it would not be necessary for 
you to go over the whole matter, unless the gentlemen of the com- 
mittee would like to have you do so. 

Mr. Elliott. I was going to briefly sketch it to the committee 
and let this go into the record without going into the whole matter. 

Mr. Stephens of Mississippi. Very well, do so as briefly as you 
can. 

Mr. Rothermel. Might I make the suggestion that this was done 
with the sanction of the Secretary of Commerce and the Secretary 
of the Treasury. 

Mr. Ellioti\ I was going to bring that in. 

Mr. RoTHEBMEL. And the fact that they had to go without au- 
thority from the House was necessary because they could not have 
gotten the authority in time to reach the islands at the season of the 
year when the seals come in. 

Mr. Elliott. Yes ; I am going to bring that in. 

Mr. Scott. Why was it necessary to have a committee of the House 
go there in order to get information upon which the Department 
of Justice might act ? 

Mr. Elliott. Because there was no one in the Department of 
Justice who could have gone up there, and in this time, absolutely 
limited between the 10th and '20th of July, have secured that evidence. 
There was no man in the Department of Justice who possessed the 
knowledge and the understanding of the ground, who could have 
possibly gone up there and secured what I secured. 

Mr. Scott. Why couldn't the Department of Justice employ you 
to go up there ? 



FUR SEAL INVESTIGATIOlSr IN ALASKA. 5 

Mr. Elliott. There was no time to see the Department of Justice. 
We had to go ( n this day or not at all, because it was necessary that 
we reach the islands not later than the lOtli of July — between the 
10th and 20th of July. It was absolutely necessary that we should 
be there at that time to secure this evidence. 

Mr. Scott. Why ^ 

]Mr. Elliott. Because that is the " height of the sealing season." 
the time in which the skins must be secured in order that there might 
not be any controversy in the courts as to their being out of season. 

Mr. Scott. AVhere were you; where did you start from? 

Mv. Elliott. From Washington. 

Mr. Scott. Why was it impossible to use the Department of Jus- 
tice ? 

Mr. P^LLioTT. Because there was nobody there who could have 
gone up there and secured these skins. 

Mr. Scott. But why was it impossible for you and those inter- 
ested in your going to communicate with the Department of Justice ? 
AVhy couldn't 3^ou communicate with the Department of Justice 
just as easily as with Mr. Eothermel? 

Mr. Elliott. Because this work had been done under the auspices 
of the committee. These facts had been gathered and were in the 
possession of the committee; the whole case centered upon that evi- 
dence, and I was the only man that knew how to get up there and 
get that particular physical exhibit. If we had gone into negotia- 
tions with the Department of Justice we might have gotten away 
perhaps by the 1st of September (;r October, when it would have been 
too late. 

Mr. Scott. You were in the (loxernment employ at that time? 

Mr. Elliott. Not at all. I was a voluntary witness for the com- 
mittee, and I waited and waited for something to be done by the 
House, and I saw that if we had to wait so long it would have to be 
dropped altogether, and I told Mr. Rothermel 

Mr. Scott. What was your business at that time? You say you 
were not in the Government employ. 

Mr. Elliott. My business is real estate and fruit growing at 
Cleveland, Ohio. That has been, my business for years before I 
came here. 

Mr. Stephens of Mississippi. You had been in the employ of the 
Government years ago, had you not? 

Mr. Elliott. Yes; away back there. I am older than you think. 
I am GO years old. and in early times I was in the Smithsonian In- 
stitution. I made an elaborate investigation at the instigation of the 
Smithsonian as far back as 187'2. 1874. and 18TG on these islands. 
Then, again, I went up under authority of a special act of Congress in 
1890, as a special agent of the Secretary of the Treasury and the 
AVays and Means Committee, and secured certain evidence, which I 
brought down and which they used. Then, again, I went up this 
time in this way. But I have never been connected with the Gov- 
ernment as a hired employee, as a clerk, except at these brief inter- 
vals when I had to sign the pay roll as an agent of the Government 
going to the Islands. I have always done my work by the piece, 
by contract, as an artist and naturalist. 

Mr. Stephens of Mississippi. How long have you been engaged in 
this particular Avork? 



6 FUR SEAL INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA. 

Mr. Elliott. I first went up in 1872. 

Mr. Si-EPiiEXS of Mississippi. I mean for which you are asking 
compensation now. 

Mr. Elliott. I have the dates here. I started on the 2()th of 
June — on the evening of the 20th of June — and I got back here on 
the 22d of August and filed my report on the 31st. Then they re- 
quired a supplemental statement, which was laid before the committee 
on October 13, wiien they held their first meeting after I got back. 
That Avas incorporated in the record of January 17. Following 
that, all of these gentlemen wdio are specified in these details and 
accused of fraud and collusion with the fraud were notified, and 
copies of this statement and the testimony and evidence gathered on 
the islands was sent to them all, from Secretary Nagel down — 17 or 
18 of them. They all received these notices and, with the exception 
of two men, they all declined to come before the committee and deny 
it, because they could not deny it. The two that came, the evidence 
shows that they simply fastened themselves deeper and firmer in the 
clutches of the law than they were before. 

Mr. Stephens of Texas. Did you seize any skins up there, and, if 
so, wdiat did you do with them ? 

Mr. Elliott. Yes; the way I got the skins was this: The new ad- 
ministration came in on the 4th of March, 1913, and all these men 
who had been connected with the lessees engaged in this illegal kill- 
ing — that is, the relics of them— are still on the islands. They were 
still in charge at that time, and they would be so until the new man 
appointed by the new administration could arrive there and take 
charge ; and I knew that unless I got up there and got the work from 
their hands as they had been doing it for the last 20 years I would have 
no proof to connect them with it for the past 20 years. So I had to go 
up there without their knowing it. I got u]) there and I got 400 
skins, taken just as they have been taking them for the last 20 years, 
by the same men. under the same direction, so that we have the 
physical evidence — the physical exhibit showing that they " loaded " 
these little skins with blubber so as to make them weigh into the class 
of big skins. That is the wiiole detail of the fraud which has been 
practiced on the Government for 20 years, whereby thousands and 
tens of thousands of small skins have been taken, "loaded" with 
blubber, so that they weighed as much as big skins. I got the evi- 
dence wdiich shows that they were illegally taking the little skins of 
yearlings instead of the big skins of 2-year olds, which they SAvore 
they had taken. Then Ave took their evidence. 

Mr. Stephens of Texas. Of the men who had been in charge for 
20 years? 

Mr. Elliott. Yes. We got their evidence and their admissions 
and their specimens of tlie yearling skins laid doAvn there on the 
table, Avhich tallied exactly with the sales records of London. It 
was necessary to get them exactly as they had been taken, and by 
the same men: I knew that if we went up there without publicity 
and without their knoAving that Ave Avere coming up, they Avould begin 
to take the skins as they always had done. We got up there Avithout 
their knoAving it, and landed. Before Ave landed, on July 7, they 
had taken 400 skins just as they have ahvays taken them for the last 
20 years. As soon as I landed on July 9. I Avent to the salt house, 
and said. " I Avant these skins undisturbed until I Aveigh and measure 



FUR SEAL INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA. 7 

them." There I had them. Those 400 skins are, to-day, in the 
possession of the Secretarj^ of Commerce; and we have just got a 
resolution through Congress Avliich enables the Secretary of Com- 
merce to hold them until the Department of Justice wants them. 
They were taken in violation of the law. The same men who were 
there during the lease were there when we got there. Secretary 
Redfield has removed all of them since, but they were there when this 
work was done. 

Mr. Stephens of Texas. In what respect did they violate this lease 
by the taking of these skins? 

Mr. Elliott. The law and likewise the lease Avas violated in this Avay, 
The Secretary of the Treasury, Secretary Carlisle, in 1S96. issued 
an order, May 14, that no yearling seals should be killed and no 
seals having skins weighing less than G pounds should be taken. 

Mr. Stephens of Texas, what about females? 

Mr. Elliott. Females, of course, are excepted. This refers to 
killable seals, those out on the hauling grounds. No yearlings should 
be killed and no seals having skins weighing less than 6 pounds. 
Now, to overcome that difficulty, and to take these little seals whose 
skins immediately after they are ])roperly taken, weigh only 4^ 
pounds, they instructed the natives up there in skinning, to leave 
half an inch of blubber attached to the skin, so that when that little 
3 or 4 pound skin was put on the scales it would Aveigh all the Avay 
from 6^ to 8 pounds. That is all admitted by these men under oath. 

Mr. Stephens of Texas. You have the evidence of the men who did 
this skinning, stating that they had been so instructed, to blubber 
those skins in that way for the purpose of making them weigh 6 
pounds or more? 

Mr. Elliott. Yes ; that is all in the testimony. 

Mr. Scott. Now, what did you do Avith that testimoiiA^ ? 

Mr. Elliott. That testimony Avill be used by the Attorney General. 

Mr. Scott. He can't use that. It is not admissible in any criminal 
prosecution. 

Mr. Elliott. These men can all be brought down here to testify. 
I have located the men ; I have got their statements and the Attorney 
General can subpoena them and bring them doAvn here and use them 
as witnesses. But it Avas necessary to locate these men, and get these 
skins taken by these men just as they have been taking them for the 
last 20 yea'-s, and to do that it Avas necessary to go up there Avithout 
publicity, because if they had knoAvn that Ave Avere coming up there, 
thev Avould have skinned them properly. 

Mr. EoTHERMEL. You dlscoA'ered the Carlisle rules on the islands, 
didn't you? 

Mr. Elliott. Yes. 

Mr. RoTHER^iEL. But they were noAvhere on record in Washington. 

Mr. Elliott. They were concealed in Washington. They have been 
concealed for two years by the officials in charge of the Bureau of 
Fisheries. Their existence had been denied to us, and of course 1 
could not question that denial: but, I told Mr. Rothermel, among 
other things, that Mr. Carlisle had in these early days, issued regula- 
tions, although I could not, in the face of these sworn statements 
prove it; but, if I could get hold of the journals up there, the 
records of the facts, I could find those regulations. And I did find 



8 FUR SEAL INVESTKiATlOX IX ALASKA, 

them, l)eaiitiiully engrossed, and I brouoht copies do^vn and they are 
admitted now. They are in files of the bureau. 

Mr. Stephens of Texas. The originals are found now? 

Mr. P^LLiOTT. Yes. 

Mr. Stephens of Texas. Is that all in the hands of the Depart- 
ment of Justice i' 

Mr. Elliott. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Stephens of Mississippi. Has the Department of Justice 
taken any steps in this matter? 

Mr. Elliott. There were two things under consideration by the 
Department of Justice. The first Avas whether to bring a criminal 
indictment against these men. The statute of limitations lets out 
the lessees; it does not let out the Federal officials; but, we found 
that we could not hold these high officials with a criminal indict- 
ment because it would be necessary to show that they had full 
knowledge of it. although I tliought that the '' guilty knowledge " 
which they possessed, could be fastened upon theuL I have been all 
over that with the Assistant Attorney General and it has been 
decided that we could not do that; but. civil suits and prosecutions 
to recover, are undeniably and unquestional)ly good. 

Mr. Scott. To recover what ? 

Mr, Elliott. To i-ecover the money from these lessees for those 
skins which they have taken in violation of law. 

Mr. Stephens of Texas. What liond do they have? 

Mr. Elliott. They have a bond; but that is only a small part of 
what the Go^'ernment will eventually get. Not only will the Gov- 
ernment recover the bond. Avhich is $500,000. but it Avill recover the 
value of each and every one of these skins which has been taken in 
violation of law. There are 128.000 specific skins that we have got, 

Jlr, Stephens of Mississippi, No suits have been filed have they? 

Mr. Elliott, Application for suit has been filed; but there is 
no hurry about the civil suits because they might run along for 
months, or a year or two, without prejudice. But the criminal mat- 
ters we found that we could not carry through. I think it is right, 
too, the way the Federal statutes are drawn. l)ecause it is impossible 
for a man coming clown here to know everything that the men under 
him do. And that is all right, although I am sorry that a certain 
man can not be held, because I do believe he had full guilty knowl- 
edge. We have the civil suit, and we have been assured there is no 
question about the validity of that. There is no hurry about that; 
the persons are there, and the evidence is there, and I told them, 
^ I am ready whenever you want me." 

Mr. Stephens of Texas. Who paid your expenses up there? 

Mr. Elliott. I advanced them. I never thought anything about 
it at the time. I liad no time to discuss it, or do anything about it. 
I had to make arrangements with the Secretary of Commerce to 
land on the islands, and that was all done that day, and letters were 
sent after me that caught me the day I was ready to sail. Mr. 
Eothermel made arrangements with the Secretary of Commerce 
and the Secretary of the Treasury and sent their letters to me. I 
made arrangements to go over from Unimak Pass on the revenue 
cutter to the seal islands, because it was necessary that I should be 
there between the 10th and 20th of Jul}', or this evidence and skins 



FUR SEAL INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA. 9 

secured ^YOuld be '' oiit of season."' and I knew what that woukl mean 
in a hiw court. 

Mr. Si^PHENs of Texas. The employees would have been changed, 
too, if 3'ou had waited. 

Mr. Elliott. Yes; and we would not have had that connecting 
link. Now we have got the same men, the same working force that 
has been on the islands ever since 1809. 

Mr. Stephens of Mississippi. I notice that the amount asked for 
by you as compensation for this work is $6,182. How did you arrive 
at that amount? 

Mr. Elliott. I have it right here. This has all been gone over by 
the Committee on Accounts, and those gentlemen agreed upon it- 
Mr. Abercrombie. Mr. Ten Eyck, and Mr. Parker. They said it was 
all right. 

Ml". Stephens of Texas. Did you estimate it on the amount of 
money you paid out and then a per diem? 

Mr. Elliott. I will read it to you right here. It was a difficult 
thing to do. I disliked very much to j^lace a valuation on my serv- 
ices, but they insisted that I do so. I wanted them to fix it. I have 
the whole thing here : 

For services as a duly qualified expert witness in attendunce on the 
committee from Jane 20, 1913. U) April 2, 1914; 286 days, at 

$20 per ("Jem i $0,720.00 

To traveling expenses and subsistence from Washington, 
D. C. to seal i: lands and return, .Tune 20 to Aug. 27, 1913 
(10,280 miles traversed), as per items, to wit: 

Ilailroad ti'Uet, Washington, L>. C, to Seattle, Wash .$73. (30 

Sleeping car, V.'ashington, D. C, to Seattle, Wash. 

(5 days in transit) 7.50 

]\Ieals (5 (lays in transit) 15.00 

Saattle, 5 days subsistence and lodging 25. 00 

S. S. Victoria, ticket to Nome. Alaska 100.00 

Expenses, outfit, etc., on seal islands 50. 00 

Expenses on the revenue cutters .50. 00 

Railrojul ticket and return expenses, Seattle to Wash- 
ington, I>. C 106. 15 

Seattle (5 davs subsistence and lodging) 25.00 

462. 25 

Grand total 6, 182. 25 

Mr. Scott. What was that per diem? 

Mr. Elliott. $20 per day, 286 days from June 20, 1913, to April 2, 
1914. I was in constant attendance on the committee during that 
time, preparing statements of the case for them. I will give you the 
evidence or some of it, and you can see in a moment what it means. 
Here is a syllabus of the testimony. Here is our report made by Mr. 
Gallagher and myself with all the details of that work all sworn to. 
Then here is the testimony taken, 

Mr. Stephens of Texas. When does your employment with this 
committee end? 

Mr. Elliott. April 2, 1914. 

Mr. Stephens of Texas. Have you been around here since that 
time ? 

Mr. Elliott, Oh, yes ; but that was on my ow^n account. 

Mr, Stephens of Texas. Is the Government paying you anything 
now? 

Mr, Elliott, No; oh, no. 



10 FUR SEAL ]XVEST1GATI0X IX ALASKA. 

Mr. Stephens, So the amount you are asking here is all that the 
Government -will be out? 

Mr. Ellioii\ That is all that the Government is responsible to me 
for. 

Mr. Stephens of Texas. Notwithstanding the fact that you have 
spent considerable time on it. 

Mr. Elliott. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Stephens of Mississippi. AVho helped you in this work? 

Mr. Elliott. Mr. Gallagher. 

Mr. Stephens of Mississippi. Is he the only one? 

Mr. Elliott. He is the only one; the only assistant I have had 
from start to finish. 

Mr. Stephens of Mississippi. What was Mr. Gallagher's business? 

Mr. Elliott. I never met Mr. Gallagher until I met him in Seattle. 
On the day I left Washington I told Mr. Rothermel, " I can't go up 
there alone. I want an assistant. I want a man of unquestioned 
integrity, and one who has two good stout legs under him, because 
he will have a lot of Avalking to do." I also told him, '" I want him 
to be an accomplished court reporter, because I will take testimony 
up there, and the value of his notes will be absolutely essential if we 
have any proceedings in the Department of Justice. I want a man 
who is recognized as an expert reporter, so that in everything which 
we do up there his notes, if carried into court, will have value." 

Mr. Stephens of Texas. I understood you to say that he was a 
commissioner authorized to take this testimony. 

Mr. Elliott. We did not need that, because there was one on the 
revenue cutter. 

Mr. Stephens of Texas. And you could use that commissioner? 

Mr. Elliott. If necessary, we could use him ; but we found it was 
better not to swear these natives, because it would scare them. So 
we took the testimony which they gave vokmtarily and then had 
them sign it in the form of a deposition. If we had gone in there, 
and asked them to hold up their hand and swear, they would have 
been scared to death, and would not have known anything. 

Mr. Scott. What was Mr. Gallagher's business at the time of this 
employment ? 

Mr. Elliott. He was a court reporter here in Washington, and 
one of the very best. 

Mr. Scott. You were living in Ohio at the time you say ? 

Mr. Elliott. Cleveland, Ohio. I have lived there for 69 years 
nearly. 

Mr. Scott. How did you happen to become connected with this 
matter ? 

Mr, Elliott. In early daA-s? 

Mr. Scott. Xo; at the time you started on this trip or just before. 
How was your selection made? 

Mr. Elliott. Because I had been before the committee, you know, 
during the previous Congress. I brought these charges before the 
Ways and Means Committee, and the Ways and Means Committee 
took me over there. On the 11th of May, 1911, the Ways and Means 
Committee passed a resolution to make this investigation, and then 
when the charges were laid before them they found they had so much 
work to do with their tariff schedules, and all that sort of thing, that 
Mr. Francis Burton Harrison and Mr. Underwood and Mr. Eainey 



FUR SEAL INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA. 11 

decided to have me taken to Mr. Eotlieriuers committee. They said, 
" There is a little committee that has nothing to do. and that can go 
to the bottom of it, but we have got so much to do that we won't have 
time, so we will take you over there." At first I demurred to being 
taken to that little committee; but they said. " Don't you worrj^ about 
that; they can go just as far as we can. Thej^ can go clear to the 
bottom of it," So I was taken over there from the Ways and Means 
Committee and introduced to Mr. Rothermel and I laid the charges 
before him. He spent nearly two weeks considering them. He went 
over on the Senate side and saw the Republican Senators who were 
back of me, and he finally said, "All right, Mr. Elliott, we will take 
this up." That was on May 31, 1911, and I appeared and made these 
specific charges. Then I demanded that these men who were guilty 
of these shortcomings be examined here before the committee and 
put under oath. That was drawn out until the 29th or 30th of July 
of the following year, when these hearings closed. That, of course, 
brought me very close to the committee, and they knew that I was 
thoroughly familiar with the matter. 

Mr. Stephens of Texas. Before that time you had been connected 
with Secretary Hay in drawing up the fur-seal treaty, had you not? 
Mr. Ellioit. I had been called in by John Hay on the fur-seal 
treaty. That is my treaty. 

Mr. Stephens of Texas. With the object in view of stopping 
pelagic sealing? 

Mr. Ellioit. Yes; and also stopping killing on the islands. 
Mr. Stephens of Texas. Stopping killing on the islands? 
Mr. Elliott. Yes. These charges followed that. 
Mr. Stephens of Texas. You had been employed by John Hay,. 
Secretary of State? 

Mr. Ellioti\ Yes; and I was engaged with him at work on the 
treaty when he suddenly fell sick, March 14, 1905. two days before 
Senators Nelson. Dillingham, and Patterson had consented and 
signed the treaty draft up. Then Hay died, and the treaty laid irt 
the State Department for seven years; the lessees got into the saddle 
again as soon as he died. 
"Mr. Scott. When Avas this bill introduced? 
Mr. Stephens of Texas. I introduced it on the 18th, for the pur- 
pose of getting them paid. That was all. 

Mr. Scott. Why has this resolution been delayed until the last 
few days of the session? 

Mr. Elliott. Because I asked "Sir. Eothermel, April 2, 1914, not 
to put in this resolution for my payment until the minority report 
was filed. They had given notice that they would file a minority 
report. 

Mr. S™phens of Texas. You had agreed that they should file a 
report ? 

Mr. Elliott. Oh. yes; and we agreed, on the evening of April 2, 
1914, Mr. Gallagher 'and myself, in the evening of that day, to the 
consideration of these sums by the committee. Then I asked IVIr. 
Rothermel not to move in the matter until the minority report was 
filed, because there might be something in the minoritv report which 
Avould make it necessary for the committee to recognize. It might 
be necessary for me to explain something. I waited four months 
until that report came in, which was the 28th day of July. When 



12 FUR SEAL INVESTKJATTON IX ALASKA. 

the minority i-ei)ort came in there was n()thin<>' in it but abuse of my- 
self. <ias and nonnt-nse; no denial of these facts whatever, no at- 
tempt. Then I said. "Now, Mv. Kothermel. I Avish you would put 
in my claim for compensation." 

Mr. KoTiiKHMEL. 1 was authorized l>y the committee to make the 
arrangement. 

Mr. P^LLio'i r. Oh. yes: I know that: but T asked you to hold it up. 
The record shows you were authorized to do it. Then the Committee 
on Accounts took it up, and they found what they called " irregu- 
larities."" In other woids. we had not gone into the House and asked 
for this money. Then I brought up the Belknap precedent to show 
that it w\as not necessary to go to the House first. But I did not 
press it; I did not ]>ush it. I did not chase them up and it drifted 
along. I have the Belknap case here, and it furnishes a good and 
indisputable precedent for the action of the House Committee on 
Expenditures in the Department of Commerce. June 20. 191H. 

The Belknap precedent, which occurred in 187."). is this: In De- 
cember. 187."). the House Committee on Expenditures in the Depart- 
ment of War received information of certain rank abuses in the con- 
duct of the Army posts, with the collusion therein of the Secretary of 
War, W. W. Belknap, and that certain witnesses vital to the success 
of the object of abating and reforming these abuses could be secured 
if they were secured before any advertisement of their intended 
seizure was made. 

Now. here is the first parallel. In June, 1913. the House Commit- 
tee on Expenditures in the Department of Commerce received in- 
formation that certain proofs of fraud perpetrated in the seal islands 
of Alaska could be secured for the use of the Attorney General if 
steps were taken promptly to get it without publicity. So much 
for the first parallel. 

In 1875 the Belknap committee organized and secretly sent three 
agents into the far West to secure the witnesses and other evidence 
and proof, and did so without going into the House to ask for an 
appropriation to meet the expense thereof. 

Now, here is the second parallel. The Committee on Expendi- 
tures in the Department of Commerce organized on June 20, 1913, 
and secretly sent two agents to the seal islands of Alaska charged 
W'ith the duty of securing the proof of that fraud. 

Now, here is the third parallel. The agents of the Belknap com- 
mittee in 1875 secured the witnesses and the evidence which resulted 
in the hasty resignation of Gen. Belknap and the complete abate- 
ment of the public abuses under him in the Army posts. 

The agents of the Committee on Expenditures in the Department 
of Commerce in 1913 secured the proofs desired, and this evidence 
which is necessar,y for the successful prosecution by the (rovernment 
to recover from parties to that fraud, is now in the hands of the 
Attorney General, or at his command. 

Mr. Scott. Who would they recover from ? 

Mr. Elliott. From the lessees of the islands, from the estate of 
D. O. Mills, the estate of ex-Senator Elkins, and from Isaac Liebes, 
who is living in San Francisco, worth eight or ten million dollars. 

Mr. Stephens of Texas. Where does Liebes live? 

Mr, Elliott. In a marble palace in San Francisco. 



FUR SEAL INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA. 13 

Mr. Scott. You sny you will collect it from these estates. These 
men are all dead ? 

Mr. Elliott. The estates are living. 

Mr. Scott. Do you expect to recover more than the bond? How 
much does the bond amount to? 

Mr. Elliott. $500,000. 

Mr. Scott. These men have been dead several years. 

Mr. Elliott. Thnt doesn't make any difference. 

Mr. Scott. It usually does. 

Mr. Elliott. But not in this case. 

Mr. RoTHERMEL. Mr. Isaac Liebes is still living in California. 

Mr. Scott. How is he connected with it; is he one of the lessees? 

Mr. Elliott. Yes; he was at the time these frauds were perpe- 
trated. He Avas the president of the company at the beginnig and, 
then, afterAvards he put in a dummy president. 

Mr. Scott. Was the lessee a corporation? 

Mr. Elliott. Yes, 

Mr. Scott. Is that corporation alive? 

Mr. Elliott. Yes ; it has not been dissolved that we know of. But 
the lawyers say that they can hold the estates, the legal represent- 
atives, for all these violations of the law. These men were alive when 
these violations of law took place. 

Mr. RoTHERMEL. I liave made inquiry and I find that the Elkins 
estate is tied up for 20 years. It can not be settled before that time. 

Mr, Scott. That may be, and still the limitation within Avhich 
claims could be filed might not necessarily continue. In most States 
the limitation within which claims may be filed expires at the end 
of a year. In some States it is two years. 

Mr. Elliott, Well. I understand that under the Federal statutes 
there is no limitation in a case of this kind. 

Mr, Scott, The Federal statute would not control in that case. 
The State law would have priority. 

Mr. Elliott. Well, they can hold Mr. Liebes, He is living and is 
worth about $10,000,000. 

Now, here is the fourth parallel. The expenses which the Belknap 
committee incurred amounted to some $8,000, and they were all paid 
out of the contingent fund of the House from time to time, as they 
were rendered. 

The expenses wdiich the committee on expenditures in the De- 
partment of Commerce incurred totalled some $9,500, and they have 
been duly certified to the House Committee on Accounts, August 
7 to October 7, 1911. 

Here is the fifth parallel. Had the Belknap committee gone to 
the House and asked for an appropriation before it had taken action 
incurring those expenses, the publicity of its intention would have 
resulted in a complete failure to get that evidence, which was neces- 
sary and vital for the public good. 

Had the committee on expenditures in the Department of Com- 
merce gone to the House and asked for an appropriation before it 
had taken action incurring those expenses, this publicity of its in- 
tention w^ould have resulted in defeating the very object which was 
otherwise successfully attained. 



14 FUR SEAL INVESTlfiATION IN ALASKA. 

Mr. Scott. Of course it is customary, I suppose, to liandle these 
matters from money available foi- the judiciary department, the mat- 
ter of obtaining evidence. It is very unusual to obtain evidence 
through a committee of the House for the ])urpose of Government 
suits. I was wondering why this evidence was not procured in the 
usual way. 

Mr. Elliott. Because it could not lune been procured in any 
other way except in the way I have outlined. There was nobody 
over there who could have gone up to the islands and gotten the 
evidence. 

Mr. Scott. AVhy couldn't they employ you ? 

Mr. Elliott. Because there Mas no time to go into negotiations. 
I would probably not have gotten started till September. 

Mr. Evans. Hadn't 3'ou had charges before the Department of 
Justice, before this matter came up ? 

Mr. Elliott. No, sir. 

Mr. Scott. Wasn't the Department of Justice familiar with this 
matter? 

Mr. Elliott. No, sir. I told Mr. Rothermel when we closed the 
hearings on July 20, 1912, that we lacked this physical exhibit of 
fraud, and I believed that back of that lay these records of the 
killing which had been concealed from us. 

Mr. Scott. Noav what does the Department of Justice at present 
recommend in this matter? 

Mr. Elliott. The Department of Justice has no recommendation 
to make, except to go ahead in the matter. 

Mr. Scott. I know; but with respect to this resolution, what 
recommendation does the Department of Justice make ? 

Mr. Elliott. They have had nothing to do with it. 

Mr. Scott. They have made no recommendation ? 

Mr. Elliott. Certainly not. 

Mr. Stephens of Mississippi. Have you been over there? 

Mr. Elliott. Oh. yes, 

Mr. Stephens of Texas. I believe you have not explained that this 
committee recommended to the Department of Justice the bringing 
of these suits and furnished them with all the evidence. 

Mr. Elliott. That was done, and that was my reason for going 
into the facts of it. That was done on the 13th of last August. And, 
as I stated in my opening remarks, I did labor with them. I was 
anxious to get criminal indictments against certain high officials, 
because I believed that they had guilty knowledge, but we could not 
hold them. 

Mr. Stephens of Mississippi. What officials of the Department 
of Justice did you talk to ? 

Mr. Elliott. Mr. Warren and Mr. Underwood, Assistant Attor- 
neys General ; with both of them. 

Mr. Scott. I understood you to say that the purpose of this evi- 
dence which you were ])rocuring was that it was to be used by the 
Department of Justice^ 

Mr. Elliott. Yes: they can examine the witnesses because I have 
located them. 

Mr. Scott. But the Department of Justice was not consulted be- 
fore any of these steps were taken? 



FUR SEAL INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA. 15 

Mr. Elliott. How could it be ( There was no time to do it. 
There was no time to go into any negotiation. It had to be done 
at once or not at all. If we had waited the men who could give the 
evidence would have left the Islands. 

Mr. Stephens of Texas. This matter Avas unloaded onto the Com- 
mittee on Expenditures in the Department of Commerce by the 
Ways and Means Committee. 
Mr. Scott. At that time? 
Mr. Elliott. The 15th of May, 1911. 

Mr. Scott. Not between the loth of Ma}', 1911 — when did you 
start ? 

Mr. Elliott. On the 31st of May. 
Mr. Scott. You started north on the 31st of Max ? 
Mr. Elliott. No, no: I was called and the investigation Avas 
made. I did not start to Alaska until the 20th of June, 1913. 

Mr. Stephens of Mississippi. Two years after the matter had 
been taken up by the committee. 
Mr. Elliott. Yes. 

Mr. Stephens of Mississippi. Had any consultation been had 
with the Department of Justice? 

Mr. Elliott. Oh, no; we had not reached the point where we 
could do that. We did not reach the point until we were in pos- 
session of these skins, and we did not have possession of these skins 
until the 29th of July, 1913. 

Mr. Scott. So you simply prepared the case for the Department 
of Justice without any agreement with the department? 

Mr. Elliott. We could not agree with them until we had the 
facts. 

Mr. Stephens of Texas. I understand that to be the purpose of 
all these expenditure committees to ascertain whether there have 
been any frauds perpetrated on the Government. 

Mr. Elliott. That was the idea that I got of the duty of this 
committee. That was pointed out to me by Mr. Harrison when he 
took me over to Mr. Eothermel. 

Mr. Evans. Did I understand you to say. Judge Stephens, that 
this investigation might have involved somebody in some of the de- 
partments? 

Mr. Stephens of Texas. They had some knowledge of it, that the 
law was being violated and that seals were being killed in violation 
of the agreement between the Government ancl the lessees, and if 
they had guilty knowledge of it they would be just as guilty as the 
men on the islands, under the doctrine of agent and principal. 

Mr. Evans. But was that used as an argument or reason for not 
going to the department before making the investigation? 

Mr. Stephens of Texas. We thought if we would get the evidence 
of the work as we did get it, then we would go to the department 
and see what they knew about the matter. And you will find the 
hearings full of that evidence. 

Mr. Elliott. There are thousands of pages of that testimony taken 
from those men where they are pinned down under oath, and they 
admit these things. 

Mr. Stephens of Mississippi. My understanding is that matters 
of this kind are ordinarily taken before the Committee on Accounts. 
Mr. Elliott. That is correct. 



16 FUR SF:AL INVESTKiATTON IN ALASKA. 

Mr. Stephens of Mississip[)i. And you went there? 

Mr. Elliott. Yes. 

Mr. Stepfiens of Mississippi. Why di(hi*t the Committee on Ac- 
counts pass upon this matter '. 

Mr. Elliott. They chiimed that we ouo:ht to have gone to the 
House first and secured an appro})riation. They claimed that we 
were entitled to compensation, but thev had no mone}^ to pay us 
with. 

Mr. Stephens of Texas. They stated the fund was exhausted? 

Mr. Elliott. They stated that there was no money appropriated. 
They are an auditing committee, not an appropriating committee, 
and of course the House can do as it pleases. They can order our 
payment it it is brought up on the floor of the House. The com- 
mittee tried to find some way in which they could get around it. 
They worked on this Belknap precedent for some time. 

Mr. Stephens of Mississippi. Did that resolution to pay the 
Belknap committee come through the Committee on Claims or the 
Committee on Accounts? 

Mr. Elliott. The Belknap committee did not go into the House 
for any money at all. 

Mr. Stephens of Mississippi. Was there any question about set- 
tlement ? 

Mr. Elliott. It was put into the Committee on Accounts. The 
account Avas rendered just as we rendered ours. The Belknap agents 
rendered their accounts to the Committee on Accounts and they were 
paid. 

Mr. Stephens of Mississippi. So there is that precedent for them 
to go to the Committee on Accounts rather than to come to this 
committee ? 

Mr. Elliott. I think so, but the lawyers thought it was best not 
to do that. 

Mr. Stephens of Texas. My object in the matter, if the chairman 
will permit me, w\^s that I felt the necessity of getting this pay for 
these gentlemen, for their services, because I was instrumental in 
part, as a member of the committee, in sending them up there. I 
agreed to everything and helped ferret this thing out. I was sure 
that they w^ould make good, as they have, and that the evidence 
would be worth a great deal to the Government in the final recovery. 
And I think Ave have laid before the Department of Justice a 
splendid case from our investigations. 

Mr. Evans. How did your committee stand on the payment of this 
claim? 

Mr. Stephens of Texas. There was a minority report against it, 
signed by two members, Mr. McGuire and Mr. Patton. 

Mr. Evans. How many men are there on the committee? 

Mr. Stephens of Texas. Seven. 

Mr. Stephens of Mississippi. Five signed the majority report? 

Mr. Stephens of Texas. Yes. 

Mr. Evans. Do you recall what was the objection of the minority 
members to the payment of the bill ? 

Mr. Elliott. They said it was not authorized. 

Mr. Stephens of Texas. I think they claimed that we had no au- 
thority for this investigation. 



FUR SEAL INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA, 17 

]Mr. Elliott. Mr. Mann said on the floor that we had full authority 
to make the investigation, but that Ave had no authority to make that 
expenditure without an order from the House. 

Mr. Stephens of Texas. I think that is the contention all through. 
They do not deny the facts, but they deny the authority. 

Mr. Elliott. Here is the request to the committee, signed by Mr. 
Rothermel, Mr. Stephens, Mr. Bruckner, and Mr. Walsh October 7, 
1914. Mr. Watkins was absent at the time but he was in full accord 
with it. 

jNIr. Evans. There is no question about the employment of these 
gentlemen ? 

Mr. Stephens of Texas. Xone whatever, and that is the reason 
I feel under moral obligation to see that they get their pay in accord- 
ance with the understanding. 

Mr. Evans. The majority of the committee signed the report 
in good faith. 

Mr. Elliott. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Stephens of JNlississippi. Was there anj^ agreement in regard 
to the compensation of these men? 

Mr. Stephens of Texas. No ; it was to be left for further considera- 
tion of the committee. 

Mr. Elliott. In the first place, when we started up I never thought 
about it. The cjuestion was to get up there, and I left directions with 
Mr. Rothermel how to get Secretary Redfield and the Secretary of 
the Treasury to get permits to land there. And I had to go imme- 
diately, that very night, because I knew from long experience in going 
to those islands that if I did not make the Government revenue cutter 
at Unimak Pass on the 7th of July we would not get to the islands 
in time, and the whole work would be lost. 

Mr. Stephens of Texas. We thought that Mr. Elliott having been 
an expert and having been emploj^ed as an expert in other cases we 
would be better able to form an idea as to what we should pay him 
after the work was done. I did not know anything about this kind 
of work, but we were willing for that matter to be ascertained after- 
wards. 

Mr. Stephens of Mississippi. You had been employed by the Gov- 
ernment in an expert capacity before? 
Mr. Elliott. Yes. 

Mr. Stephens of Mississippi. AVhat was your compensation? 
Mr. Elliott. I was engaged first an an expert, as a collaborator, 
for the Smithsonian Institution. Then I got in with John Hay, 
and, of course, he died before I was fully paid. In this case I told 
these gentlemen I did not like to fix the value of my services; that 
they could look into the records of similar experts and see what men 
had been paid, and they did look into the matter here in the Dis- 
trict and found that experts had been paid all the way from $30 
to $100 a day, and I said take it all in all I do not w^ant to appear 
as though — although I am perhaps as prominent an authority as 
there is in the world on this subject — I said I did not like to put in 
my services at the top, so make it an average of $20 a da}^ — make 
it modest. 

Mr. Stephens of Mississippi. What compensation had you been 
paid by the Government for the word done by you? 

44682—16 2 



18 FUR SEAL INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA. 

Mr. Elliott. I was paid by iviecework. as an expert. 

Mr. Stephens of Mississippi, always'^ 

Mr. Elliott. I went up once as an ap:ent at so much per day. 

Mr. Stephens of Mississippi. What was it per day ? 

Mr. Elliott. Twelve dollars per day and my expenses. There is 
where I gathered this knowledge which constitutes me an expert. 
It gave me the experience away back there in 1872, 1873, 1871, and 
1890. Yon see you gather your knowledge and you gather your in- 
formation by this experience, from the years of study I have spent 
on the whole question. My work has been published all over the 
world in different languages. You can go into any library in the 
civilized world and 3'ou will find my work on pinnates and seals. 

Mr. Rothermel. I wish the committee would permit Mr. Elliott 
to write out a short sketch of his experience along this line. 

Mr. Stephens of Mississippi. AVe would be glad to have anything 
he may desire to submit, of course. 

Mr. Elliott. That is all in the testimony. 

Mr. Stephens of Mississippi. There is a call of the House now. 
Shall we recess and come back here at 1-2.30, or would you gentle- 
men prefer to come to-morrovr morning? 

Mr. Scott. Our time in the afternoon is always very uncertain. 

Mr. Stephens of Mississippi. Suppose then we make it 10 o'clock 
to-morrow morning to conclude this matter The committee will 
stand adjourned. 



SuBC0:Nr3IITTEE OF THE CoMMITTEE ON ClAIMS, 

House or Representati\'es, 
Wednesday^ February 2^^ 1915. 
The subconnnittee met at 10 o'clock a. m.. Hon. Hubert D. Stephens 
(chairman) presiding. 

STATEMENT OF MR. HENRY W. ELLIOTT— Continued. 

Mr. Stephens. Mr. Scott, do you wish to examine Mr. Elliott? 

Mr. Scott. Yes, sir; I want to ask him a number of questions. Mr. 
Elliott. I Avould like to see your itemized bill. 

Mr. Elliott. The stenographer has it. I gave him the only copy 
Iliad at the hearing yesterday, and I presume you can get it froin the 
committee room. I do not think I have it carried out in detail in 
those papers [indicating] . I have these traveling-expense items ; but 
I have in the other statement that $437 itemized for tickets, meals, 
and everything. That is in the official statement. That statement 
was agreed upon between Mr. Eothermel, Mr. Gallagher, and myself 
on the evening of April 2, 1911. That amount was fixed. 

Mr. Eothermel. I did not understand that statement. 

Mr. Elliott-. I say that Mr. Gallagher and myself were called on 
by you on April 2, 1914, to submit our accounts, and after a two 
hours' discussion we agreed upon these sums of $fi.000 for myself and 
$3,500 for Mr. Gallagher. 

Mr. Eothermel. If I may be permitted, Mr. Chairman, I would 
simply say that it was immaterial to me as to whether the amount 
was too large or too small, because it was to be submitted to the com- 
mittee to determine the amount. 



FUR SEAL INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA. "19 

Mr. Elliott. And 'you did that in obedience to the order of the 
committee made that morning; at least, you informed me that that 
was the order of the committee made in executive session and pub- 
lished in the public records. 

Mr. KoTHERMEL. So far as that question vras concerned, it would 
not matter to me whether it was $1,000 or $10,000. 

Mr. Scott. Of this total amount of $6,182.25, what amount is for 
services and what amount is for expenses? 

Mr. Elliott. What I consider to be for my services is the per diem 
there for my services as an expert, and my traveling expenses come in 
there. That I did in obedience to Mr. Abercrombie's request on 
August 25, following, that we itemize it. It is itemized and is in the 
official record. 

Mr. Scott. Then your claim for services is $6,182? 

Mr. Elliott. Yes, sir ; for my services as an expert for that num- 
ber of days. 

Mr. Scott. And Mr. Gallagher's claim for services is wdiat amount — 
$3,000? 

Mr. Elliott. For services and living and traveling expenses, $3,300. 

Mr. Scott. Is it $3,318? 

Mr. Elliott. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Scott. What part of that is for services? 

Mr. Elliott. I am partly responsible for that; because after he 
and Mr. Rothermel had worked over this thing that evening of 
April 2, 1914, and neither one of them could quite agree on the 
matter, they referred it to me, and I said, " I will take it up in this 
way : Mr. Gallagher is an expert court reporter, and he makes from 
$25 to $30 a day; he has been engaged for 83 days with us on this 
work, and that would be $2,500 for his services, and, then, for his 
living and traveling expenses I would give him another $1,000." 

Mr. Scott. How many days did you say ? 

Mr. Elliott. He was actually engaged with us for 83 days. 

Mr. Scott. Was that on the trip to Alaska? 

Mr. Elliott. Yes, sir; and on his return he was engaged in help- 
ing to prepare the report you have there. 

Mr. Scott. How many days were you gone on this Alaska trip ? 

Mr. Elliott. We started on June 20 and we got back on August 22. 

Mr. Scott. That was about two months? 

Mr. Elliott. Yes, sir. I will say with reference to that work of 
preparing the report that with Mr. Gallagher's help it was placed in 
shape and sumbitted on August 31. 

Mr. Scott. It was submitted in that form? 

Mr. Elliott. No, sir ; in manuscript form. Most of the typewrit- 
ing was done by Mr. Gallagher in his office, and the rest of it was 
done in longhand by myself. 

Mr. Scott. His services terminated at what time? 

Mr. Elliott. When we finished that report; he had to go to St. 
Louis for several days in November following as an expert witness. 
He went there for the purpose of assisting in the separation and 
identification of the 400 skins which were brought from the islands 
and which are, to-day, set apart for the use of the Attorney General. 

Mr. Scott. Was there a hearing held at St. Louis? 



20 rUR SEAL INVESTKiATION IX ALASKA. 

Mr. Ellio'it. It was not a hearing. That was for the identifica- 
tion of those skins that had arrived from the Islands. There were 
400 skins, plus certain others, making 2,200 or 2,300 altogether. 

Mr. Scott. Were those skins identified in Alaska? 

Mr. Elliott. Yes, sir; and then, when they were received here at 
the department, thej^ were sent to St. Louis, where they w'anted to 
sell these skins; then. Mr. Redfield said that he wanted to hold up 
and seperate these 400 skins. Then Mr. Gallagher, with the coopera- 
tion of Mr. Eothermel, went down there for that purpose, as he was 
the only man wh(> had Avorked with me on the islands and knew every 
skin. 

Mr. Scott. How did he identify them ? 

Mr. Elliott. TJiey were identified on the islands and tagged. 

JSlr. Scott. Then, why Avas it necessary to send a man to St. Louis 
to identify them if they Avere tagged? 

Mr. Elliott. Because they Avanted to have the identification made 
perfect for the use of the courts. 

Mr. Scott. Now, you arrived and began your Avork in Alaska about 
July 10? 

Mr. Elliott. I got there on the evening of July 8. We anchored 
off St. Paul Island and went ashore. T]\e next morning, July 9 

Mr. Scott (interposing). I think Ave could get along faster if you 
would simply ansAver my questions and then stop. I suggest that 
because we will ne\"er get through with the examination if you con- 
tinue talking after answering the questions. The purpose of my 
question Avas simply to fix the date of your arrival there. 

Mr. Elliott. We arrived on July 8 : landed July 9. 

Mr. Scott. I Avish you woidd enumerate specifically and as briefly 
as you can just Avhat information you discovered in Alaska that was 
not available here or that had not been discovered before. 

Mr. Elliott. In the first place. I discovered in the official agent's 
journal the '" Carlisle rules," published there on June 17, dated May 
14, 189G, forbidding the killing of yearling seals. Those rules had 
been concealed from the committee. 

Mr. Scott. Well, you have ansAvered the question? 

Mr. Elliott. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Scott. Then, I w^ant to take that up. Had you before that 
time made any investigation here in Washington in the Department 
or Bureau of Fisheries Avhere the order Avas issued ? 

Mr. Elliott. Secretary Carlisle issued the order on Ma}' 14, 1896. 

Mr. Scott. He Avas Secretary of the Treasury ? 

Mr. Elliott. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Scott. Had you made a full investigation here in Washington 
in the Treasury Department to ascertain Avhether there had been 
kept here the original order or any record of its issuance ? 

Mr. Elliott. The agent of the Bureau of Fisheries Avas put under 
examination and denied that there was any such order, and I was 
there to make the investigation 

Mr. Scott (interposing). Then, you had made no investigation in 
the office of the Secretary of the Treasury ? 

Mr. Elliott. I could not, because it Avas denied that there was any 
such order. 

Mr. Scott. Do you know now whether the original order is in 
existence here in Washington or not? 



FUR SEAL INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA. 21 

Mr. Ei.LioTT. Yes, sir; because we had a certified copy of it from 
the Secretary of Commerce. 

Mr. Scott. Then it is in existence? 

Mr. Elliott. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Scott. And conkl have been obtained at any time by applying 
at the right phice? 

Mr. Elliott. It was asked for and denied. 

Mr. Scott. It was asked for by w^hom? 

Mr. Elliott. By the chairman of tlie committee. The chairman 
of the committee asked him if tliere were any regulations of that 
kind, and Dr. Everman. representing the Bureau of Fisheries, 
denied 

Mr. Scott (interposing). But I am now talking about the Secre- 
tary of the Treasury, the man who issued the order. 

Mr. Elliott. I had no authority to dispute the statement of the 
bureau officials here. 

Mr. Scott. I am not concerned about that. I w^ant to know whether 
or not this information with respect to this order was at hand and 
available to the Department of Justice. Did they apply for it at the 
place where that record is kept? 

Mr. Elliott. I did not know there was any such record. 

Mr. Scott, I am not concerned with what you knew, but I am 
concerned to know what was available to the Department of Justice. 

Mr. Elliott. They had nothing. 

Mr. EoTHERMEL. May I make a suggestion at this point ? We 
asked the bureau officials to bring all of the regulations before the 
committee. 

Mr. Scott. I understand that. 

Mr. RoTHERMEL. And this was not in it at all. and they claimed 
that those were all of the regulations. 

Mr. Scott. \Vliat I want to ascertain is this: It was stated here 
yesterday that this investigation or trip to Alaska was made for 
the purpose of procuring evidence for the benefit of the Department 
of Justice, and I want to know what was obtained there that was not 
available to the Department of Justice here. 

Mr. Elliott. That was obtained there because it was denied to the 
Department of Justice. 

Mr. Scott. So that this order, of which you discovered a copy in 
Alaska, is in fact an original order on file here? 

Mr. Elliott. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Scott. What other piece of evidence or whiit other facts did 
you learn Avhile in Alaska that were not available here in Wash- 
ington ? 

llr. Elliott. Well, we got this physical exhibit of 400 skins. 

Mr. Scott. Now, what bearing has that exhibit of 100 skins upon 
the subject of the investigation? 

Mr. Elliott. It shows exactly the method by which the lessees 
loaded the little skins so as to nuike them weigh up to what the regu- 
lations prescribed— that is, to make them weigh as big skins. 

Mr. Scott. Now, what was the limit that the regulations permitted 
that year? 

Mr. Elliott. Five pounds. 

Mr. Scott. Do you know what the purpose of that limit was? 

Mr. Elliott. It was to prevent them from killing little seals. 



22 FUR SEAL INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA. 

Mr, Scott, How little? 

Mr. Elliott, Yearling seals, 

Mr, Scott, What is a yearling seal? 

Mr, Elliott, A yearling seal is a seal that has returned to tlie 
islands after its first winter's migration, 

Mr, Scott, For how long a time is that seal considered to be a 
yearling? 

Mr. P^LLiOTT, Until it returns to the islands the next year after its 
second winter's migration, 

Mr. ScoTT, How old. in fact, would it be at the time j^ou would 
call it a yearling? 

Mr. Elliott, Anywhere from 11 to Ifi months, 

Mr. ScoTT. And after that it would be called w^hat ? 

Mr. Elliott. After its return to the islands from its second win- 
ter's migration it is called a 2-year-old seal. 

Mr. Scott. So that there is no specific time within which a seal 
is a yearling, and it is only an approximation? 

Mr, Elliott. No. sir: it is not an approximation. It is a distinct 
and specific thing, and there is no approximation about it. They are 
called "yearlings'' when they return to the island from their first 
winter's migration — they are called yearlings then, from start to 
finish. 

Mr. Scott. From the time they return from their first winter's 
migration until 

Mr. Elliott (interposing). Until they leave. 

Mr. Scott. Until they leave again? 

Mr. Elliott. Yes. sir: they are yearlings. 

Mr. Scott. How large is a yearling? 

Mr. Elliott. A yearling seal weighs about 3S pounds, and is about 
38 or 39 inches long. 

Mr. Scott. How long are they on the islands from the time when 
they return from their first winter's migration until they leave again? 

Mr, Elliott, They come in June and July and leave in Xovember. 

Mr, Scott, Do they grow during that time? 

Mr, ElIjIOtt. Yes. sir; but they are still yearlings and are recog- 
nized as yearlings. 

Mr. Scott. So that the Aveight of a skin taken from a yearling 
seal might depend largely upon the time it was killed, just as it 
would be in the case of cattle and hogs? 

Mr. Elliott. Yes. sir: with this marked difference: These seals 
are practically all born at one time every year and grow uniformly, 
while cattle and horses are born in every month of the year. The 
seals are born only in the middle of the year: nine-tenths of them 
betweeen the -tth and 20th of July, Therefore it is a thousand times 
easier to place them as yearlings in the natural order of life beyond 
anv doubt or dispute than if they were horses, cattle, or swine, 

Mr, Scott, Those 400 skins you have referred to were taken from 
yearlings? 

Mr, Elliott. No. sir: not all from yearlings. It is a physical 
exhibit of that manv skins, showing how they covered up 139 year- 
ling skins. They show that these yearling skins have an excess of 
blubber attached to them, while the 2 and 3 year old skins are skinned 
" clean " doAvn free of blubber. 



FUR SEAL INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA. 2S 

Mr. Scott. Is there any other theory upon which young skins are 
loaded or left with more blubber on them than the older skins? 

Mr. Elliott. Certainh^ there is none. It is much easier to salt 
them if the blubber is not on the skins, and naturally there ought 
to be more on the old skins. 

Mr. Scott. I did not know but what the youth of the animal 
might require a difterent method of treating the skin? 

Mr. Elliott. Not the slightest. 

Mr. Scott. As I understand it, your theory is that these 400 skins 
were below the limit ? 

Mr. Elliott. No, sir; not all of them. 

Mr. Scott. Well, how many of them? 

Mr. Elliott. I think there were 139 in this 400 which are below 
the limit. That is set out in detail in our report. If they had been 
properly skinned, they Avould have been 4|-pound skins and below 
the limit fixed in the regulations. As it was these little skins 
weighed up from 5^ to 8^ pounds, and that exhibit shows you in a 
minute just how it was done. We can lay that question before a 
jury. We can take a 34-inch skin and show that it weighs 4| pounds, 
and we have 18 of them in this catch. Then we can take another 
skin of exactly the same length or size and show that it weighs 8^ 
pounds because this excess of blubber is attached to it. Then the 
testimony we brought out shows that the weights used as London 
sales weights were fictitious weights, because they do not weigh 
them individually in London at all 

Mr. Scott (interposing). You did not discover that in Alaska? 

Mr. Elliott. No, sir; these London sales records were the ground 
for laying the charges. 

Mr. Scott. What other evidence did you discover in Alaska ? 

Mr. Elliott. Then, we took up the very important and delicate 
matter of getting the testimony of the natives so that they could be 
identified as witnesses in the case, if the Attorney General wanted 
them: and, that is where the great value, the supreme value, of Mr. 
Gallagher's services came in. His notes will be taken in any court, 
before any jury, as being absolutely perfect. Now. we examined 
those natives very quietly without disturbing them, or alarming them 
in any way, and without asking leading questions. We have a depo- 
sition or statement of their evidence. 

Mr. Scott. Does this report contain the testimony that you took? 

Mr. Elliott. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Scott. Where is it? 

Mr. Elliott. Here it is [indicating]. That is the entire mat- 
ter — that is, the entire meeting, 

Mr. Scott. Well, we will take up this matter. I notice here over a 
page and a half of testimony apparently signed by nine witnesses. 

Mr. Elliott. Yes. sir: that is the testimony of the chief ones, or 
the active, leading men up there. 

Mr. Scott. Which one of these witnesses responded to these ques- 
tions ? 

Mr. Elliott. It is all set out in the testimony. They got together 
and formulated their answers and the spokesman answered through 
the interpreter. 

Mr. Hcott. Then, these answers are not in the language of any one 
of these witnesses? 



24 FUR SEAL INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA. 

Mr. Elliott. But they are the interpretations made by their 
chosen agent to us. 

Mr. Scott. But they are not the answers of any one of the wit- 
nesses. 

Mr. Elliott. No, sir; they are the collective answers of all of them. 

Mr. Scott, Do you mean that the interpreter would talk generally 
with the whole crowd? 

Mr. Ellio'it. To the whole crowd : and then they would put their 
heads together and, after agreeing upon it, they would send it in as 
their collective answer. Sometimes it was 20 minutes before they 
agreed. 

Mr. Scott. Now, in this testimony, covering one and three-fourth 
pages of this record, I wish you would state what particular evidence 
was developed that you deemed pertinent to this inquiry? 

Mr. Elliott. Well, beginning in 1890 they turned away yearling 
seals; they turned them away, and did not kill them: but in 1896 they 
began to kill them for the first time. That is brought out here in 
this evidence. 

Mr. Scott. I notice this testimony at the top of page 94 : 

Q. When, after this year, 1890. did you set orders to Ivill tliose snuill seals — 
to kill all of them that came in the drives? — A. In 1896 we commenced to take 
the 5-pound skins, to the best of our recollection. 

Mr. Elliott. Yes, sir; and the London records show it. They un- 
consciously and unwittingly confirmed the London records. 
Mr. Scott. The next question is : 

Q. Who directed this work of killing the small seals (molodets) on the killing 
grounds? — A. We do not remember. 

Was that the evidence? 

Mr. Elliott. They go on further to say who was in charge. They 
go on further and say that " J. Stanley Brown was the company's 
agent " at that time, and, of course, he directed it. 

Mr. Scott. That is a conclusion from the testimony, and it could 
be drawn here as well as there. 

Mr. Elliott. I could not do it until I saw them and heard them. 

Mr. Scott. Was this the only testimony you took there ? 

Mr. Elliott. No, sir; there is lots of it, and it is pregnant with 
facts — every paragraph of it. 

Mr. Scott. Now, if you will find the other testimony 

Mr. Elliott (interposing). We asked them if the Government 
agents objected, and they did not remember any objection ; and then 
they said that when the small seals were ordered killed they got 
orders to leave some blubber on those skins, and that the}' still have 
it at this time. 

Mr. Scott. T am asking about the other testimony. 

Mr. Elliott. Then this question was asked : " Did you drive and 
kill seals last summer?" and the answer was "Yes." Then this 
testimony was given: 

Q. How large were they? — A. We killed them by ages, as we had killed them 
before. 

Mr. Scott. You do not understand my question. I am asking j'ou 
whether in this document you have other testimonj' besides this one 
and three-fourths pages? 



FUR SEAL INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA. 25 

Mr. Elliott. Thig is testimony that is pregnant with facts for the 
Attorney General. 

Mr. Scott. Was there any other? 

Mr. Elliott. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Scott. What I want to find ont is how much of this document 
is devoted to the testimony of witnesses in Alaska? 

Mr. Elliott. It is right here — it is identified here. 

Mr. Scott. Is there any other testimony contained in that docu- 
ment ? 

Mr. Elliott. No, sir. It is in this volume of sworn testimony. 

Mr. Scott. Then this page and three-quarters of testimony ap- 
pearing here is not all of the testimony taken? 

Mr. Elliott. It is sufficient to bring those witnesses down here 

Mr. Scott (interposing). But there is other testimony? 

Mr. Elliott. Yes, sir ; but I regard that as the ^Dregnant testimony. 

Mr. Stephens. It is not a question of w^hat you regard as the 
most important testimony, but Mr. Scott wants to know about the 
volume of the testimony. 

Mr. Elliott. It is in here [indicating]. 

Mr. Scott. This contains letters, extracts from other hearings, 
and many things that have no relation to that trip to Alaska. 

Mr. Stephens. Is that [indicating] the same report as this [indi- 
cating] ? 

Mr. Elliott. No, sir; I will go further and show you some of it. 

Mr. Scott. I will say to Mr. Gallagher that these are the only two 
points in this report where I have been able to find any questions 
propounded and answers given. Are there any others? 

Mr. Gallagher. There were two hearings of the natives. 

Mr. Elliott. If he wants the other testimony we have here. I will 
show it to him. 

Mr. Scott. This testimony, beginning at the bottom of page 93 
and continuing to page 95, and beginning again at page 97 and con- 
tinuing to page 100 — ^these pages contain the only testimony that 
was take in Alaska by you and Mr. Gallagher and brought back? 

Mr. Elliott. That' is the testimony of the witnesses. That is all 
we wanted. It was sufficient, and it covers the ground completely. 

Mr. Scott. Aside from taking the testimony of these witnesses 
identified on these pages and procuring these skins, what other facts 
did you learn in Alaska on that trip, not available here ? 

Mr. Elliott. The fact that in 1891 the President's order restrict- 
ing the lessees to the killing of 7,500 seals had been violated on the 
islands, and we brought down from the records there the whole cor- 
respondence entered in the journals, and I have had them certified 
in the Treasurv Department. 

Mr. Scott. What records of that character did you bring back? 

Mr. Elliott. The single season's work of 1891 uncovered frauds 
amounting to $791,000. 

Mr. Scott. During all the years? 

Mr. Ellioti\ In 1891; for just that one year. 

INIr. Scott. Mr. Elliott, you are not a lawyer? 

INIr. Elliott. But I have been with lawyers, the best in the House. 

Mr. Scott. But you are not a lawyer ? 

Mr. Elliott. No, sir. I am an artist and naturalist, a real estate 
man and a fruit grower. There [exhibiting] is Exhibit H : that will 



26 FUR SEAL INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA. 

enable the Government to recover $791,000. There [exhibiting] are 
all the documents. Avhich have all been certified to by the Secretary 
of the Treasury. That record of fraud in a single season's work 
will enable the Attorney General to recover $791,000. 
Mr. Scott, I notice that this begins as follows : 

On Saturday, August 5, 1911, Mr. Bowers read into the record of this com- 
mittee, for the purpose of discrediting me 

:\Ir. Elliott (interposing). That leads up to what I have here. I 
showed before the comuiittee what they were doing and what was 
done in the islands. 

Mr. Scott. Did you find what was done in the islands? 

Mr. Elliott. That is all set out here in this report in detail, show- 
ing that on the 27th of May, 1891, they were ordered specifically to 
restrict all killing on the islands to 7,500 seals, yet I found in the 
records that they had killed nearly 14,000 in spite of the President's 
order. 

Mr. Stephens. Fourteen thousand? 

Mr. Elliott. Yes, sir ; 14,000. 

Mr. Scott. How did you ascertain that? 

Mr. Elliott. From the daily records of the killings in the jour- 
nals, and then I traced it back in the Treasury reports. 

Mr. Scott. Seven thousand five hundred was the limit that year? 

Mr. Elliott. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Scott. The 7,500 related simply to the two islands? 

Mr. Elliott. The two islands. The entire killing allowed by the 
President for that entire year. 

Mr. Scott. Were there more islands? 

Mr. Elliott. No, sir. 

Mr. Scott. All the seal herds were on those two islands? 

Mr. Elliott. Yes, sir ; nowhere else. The islands of St. Paul and 
St. George. 

Mr. Scott. Did it occur to you that it might be pretty difficult to 
go back nearly 25 years and make a civil case against anyone to 
recover ? 

Mr. Elliott. Mr. McGillicuddy, one of the best lawyers in the 
House, says that it is a perfect case, and that there is no difficulty 
at all. I will leave that to the lawyers to settle. 

Mr. Scott. That, of course, is immaterial here. 

Mr. Elliott. I have acted entirely on their suggestion. 

Mr. Scott. Do you know of any specific legislation of Congress 
relative to civil liability for taking the seals? 

Mr. Elliott. Yes, sir; that is all in the statutes, and also itemized. 
I have it somewhere here. 

Mr. Scott. Can you turn to it? 

'Mr. Elliott. Yes. sir. It is in the hands of the Attorney Gen- 
eral now. I have it all verified. Here [exhibiting] it is. I have a 
more elaborate report for the Attorney General. 

Mr. Scott (after examining statement). These are simply cita- 
tions ? 

Mr. Elliott. They cover the statutes, and cover the very case that 
we are talking about. 

Mr. Scott. But that does not do any good here. I did not know 
hut what you had the provision of the statute before you there. 

Mr. Elliott. Xo, sir. 



FUR SEAL INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA. 27 

Mr. Stephens. It' does not set out the text of the statute? 

Mr. Elliott. No, sir. Every hiAvyer has that at his command. 

Mr. Scott. Mr. Elliott, what other evidence or fact did you dis- 
cover in Alaska that Avas not available here in the records or other- 
wise ? 

Mr. Elliott. In regard to fraud? 

Mr. Scott. In regard to this subject which you went to investi- 
gate. 

Mr. Elliott. Those are the three salient features — the most im- 
portant. 

Mr. Scott. Just enumerate tliem. 

Mr. Elliott. The concealment of the killing records for 12 years, 
in violation of the Carlisle rules (the existence of Avliich was denied), 
the physical exhibit of the 400 skins, and the testimony of these 
iiatives. 

Mr. Scott. Did you perform any other service in Alaska? 

Mr. Elliott. Yes, sir ; we took a census of the herd. 

Mr. Scott. You took a census of the herd ? 

Mr. Elliott. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Scoi^r. The report shows that? 

Mr. Elliott, Yes, sir; we were very careful about that. 

Mr. Scott. A census of the seal herd taken by an estimate? 

Mr. Elliott. Yes, sir; necessarily so. 

Mr. Scott. You found a much larger herd than vou expected to 
find? 

Mr. Elliott. Xo; I did not know what I would find. I had said 
for years that the Bureau of Fisheries figures were evidentl}^ faulty. 
That is all in the sworn testimony. 

Mr. Scott. What directions had you from the committee at the 
time you left here? 

Mr. Elliott. My letter of instructions is here. No; I left that 
copy with the reporter. 

Mr. Scott. The resolution was passed bv the committee on June 
20? 

Mr. Elliott. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Scott. And provided for your appointment as a qualified ex- 
pert to gather such information as the chairman of the committee 
shall require? 

Mr. Elliott. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Scott. After the passage of thi^ resolution, what did the 
chairman of the committee do in the way of specifying the informa- 
tion that he desired you to procure in Alaska ? 

Mr. Elliott. He gave me a letter of instructions. 

Mr. Scott. HaAe you that letter? 

Mr. Elliott. No; the reporter took the copy of it yesterday. 

Mr. Scott. Is that incorporated in this report? 

Mr. Elliott. No, sir. 

Mr. Scott. I would like to see it. 

Mr. Elliott. Mr. Fitzgerald, the chairman of the Committee on 
Appropriations, has the original letter. 

Mr. Scott. We should like to have the original letter or a copy. 

Mr. Elliott. Mr. Fitzgerald has the original letter, and. also, the 
letters from Mr. Redfield, Secretary of Commerce, and Mr. McAdoo, 
Secretary of the Treasury, are in his hands. 



28 FUR SEAL IXVESTIGATION IX ALASKA. 

Mr. ScoiT'. What letter ilo you refer to from Mi: McAdoo. the 
Secretary of the Treasury^ 

Air. Elliott. The U'tter in which lie put the Kevenue-Cutter Serv- 
ice under orders to take us where we wanted to go and to come and 
take us away. Mr. Redfield's letter authorized us to land on the 
islands, and to make this investigation, and asking the Government 
representatives to extend every facility and courtesy to us. The 
original letters are in the hands of Mr. Fitzgerald, and the copies 
are in the hands of your reporter. I gave them to him yesterday in 
order to save time. 

Mv. Scott. How many membei'S are there on the Committee on 
Expenditures in the Department of Couunerce ? 

Mr. Elliott. Se^en. 

Mr. Scott. There seems to have been only three present when the 
resolution was passed? 

Mr. Elliott. There were four present. 

Mr. Scott. Mr. Stephens and Mr. "Watkins voted aye, and Mr. 
Patton voted no: only three? 

Mr. Elliott. Yes. sir: but the chairman. Mr. Rothermel, was 
there. It did not need his vote or he would have cast it. There 
was a quorum of the committee present. 

Mr. Scott. After you returned from Alaska in August, and sub- 
mitted this report, what services did you perform that make up for 
the other 280 days? 

Mr. Elliott. As soon as the report was submitted. I said to the 
chairman of the committee that that made it necessary for me to 
prepare a statement going into every detail showing the loss which 
the Government had sustained by this fraud. • 

JNIr. Scott. Where is that statement? 

Mr. Elliott. That is a part of the hearings of January 17. 

Mr. Scott. Was there any authority obtained from the House or 
from the committee to perforin those services? 

Mr. Elliott. Certainly: the committee authorized this work. 

Mr. Scott. In what way? 

Mr. Elliott. By that resolution. 

Mr. Scott. This resolution simply authorized you to go to Alaska 
and to secure such information as the chairman of the committee 
might direct you to get. 

Mr. Elliott. Here it is : 

i\Ir. Stkphens. On Deceinher 1.1. lOI.*^. the said Henry W. EUiott tiled with 
the cliiiirnian of tliis connnittee a siipjilenientary and complete rei)ort and ex- 
hihits of the said special asents of the couunittee upon the conditions of the 
fur-seal herd of Alaska and the conduct of the puhlic husiness relating 
thereto, as ordered hy the coinniittee. 

That is the statement. 

Mr. Scott. But the fact is the committee did not order anything 
except in this one resolution? 

Mr. Elliott. Xot at all, as I understand it. 

Mr. Scott. Do you know of more than one resolution being passed 
by the committee? 

Mr. Elliott. It was not necessary. 

Mr. Scott. But I asked you if you there was more than one resolu- 
tion passed by the committee ? 

Mr. Elliott. There was not anvthino- more. Why should there be? 



FUR SEAL 1^-VESTlGATlON IN ALASKA. 29 

Mr. 8coTT. I am not iiiuier interiogatioii here. 

Mr. P^LLioTT. Xo; but I should like to know. 

Mr. Scott. I am trying to aiM-ertain whether the Mhole service 
performed here, over '200 days, after you had submitted your report, 
is to fall under the authority of the original resolution, 

JNfr. Elliott. It must have been so, because the committee author- 
ized it; the committee must afterwards have ordered it. 

Mr. Scott. The supplemental woik ( 

jMr. Elliott. Yes. 

Mr. Scott. That is simply the remark of one member of the com- 
mittee. I Avant to find out whether the committee, as a committee, 
took any action other than that contained in the original resolution? 

Mr. Elliott. Why, certainly. Here it is: 

Mr. Stephens 

Mr. Scott (interposing). That is simply a remark by Mr. Ste- 
phens. 

Mr. Elliott. It is a part of the official record of the committee's 
proceedings. 

Mr. Scott. I am trying to ascertain whether there was any other 
resolution ? 

Mr. Elliott. That is exactly what I am talking about. 

Mr. Stephens. What page is that? 

Mr. Elliott. Page 162. Mr. Stephens made the motion on Decem- 
ber 15, 1913, that I file with the chairman of the committee " a sup- 
plementary and complete report.'' That was done in obedience to 
the resolution. 

Mr. Scott. What resolution? 

Mr. Elliott. The resolution you just read. 

Mr. Scott. The resolution of June 20? 

Mr. Elliott. Yes. sir; is not that perfectly plain? 

Mr. Scott. What I am trying to ascertain is whether there was 
any other resolution ever passed? 

Mr. Elliott. It did not need any. 

Mr. Scott. But you do not understand that there was any? 

Mr. Elliott. Certainly not. Mr. Stephens moved that this whole 
thing be put in the record of the committee as the act and order of 
the committee. The motion was made by Mr. Watkins and Avas 
imanimousl}^ adopted by the full committee. I do not see that there 
was anything more to be done. 

Mr. Scott. What time was devoted to this matter by Mr. Galla- 
gher ? 

Mr. Elliott. I do not like to speak for him. He is here. 

Mr. Scott. What time did he devote to it? 

INIr. Elliott. He started on the 21st of June as my assistant. I 
did not meet him until Ave took sail on the 1st of July from Seattle. 
I went ahead to make arrangements. We had only a day or two. I 
consider that he Avas under the serAdce of the committee from the 
day he left here, or that he entered the service of the committee that 
day and ended the service about 83 days later. 

Mr. Scott. That Avould be after his return? 

Mr. Elliott. Yes. sir. The Avork on this report — the typewrit- 
ing — was all done doAvn in his office. I dictated to him on the islands, 

Mr. Scott. There are very feAv notes here. 



30 FUR SEAL INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA. 

Mr. Elliott. He wrote that right from mj^ lips as we waliced o\er 
the rookeries. 

Mr. Scott. The bulk of this is made up of excerpts from other 
documents ? 

^Nfr. EixioTT. Yes. sir: and from my original work. You have to 
have excerpts. 

Mr, Scott. After Mr. Gallagher returned here his services were 
vloing the clerical Avork — aiding you in formulating this report? 

Mr. Elliott. Yes, sir; expert clerical W'ork. 

Mv. Scott. The subsequent work of 200 days, or such a matter, 
that you put in he did not colabor with you ? 

Mr. Eixiott. No, sir ; no man could ha^-e done that — without any 
reflection on anyone. 

Mr. Scott. So Mr. Gallagher's wojIc, the result of it, is all repre- 
sented in this report that was submitted? 

Mr. Elliott. He appeared as an expei't witness before the com- 
mittee once or twice and gave sworn testimony. 

Mr. Scott. Upon what matter? 

Mr. Elliott. In regard to the skins. 

Mr. Scott. ^Aliat do you mean by an expert Avitness? 

INIr. Elliott. I call him an expert witness because he has been up 
there. 

Mr. Scott. Would that make him an expert upon the seal (luestion? 

Mr. Elliott. No; but an expert upon what he testified to, the 
natives' testimony. 

ISIr. Scott. He is an expert because he took down the testimony 
in shorthand and reproduced it in typewriting? 

Mr. Elliott. Yes, sir; and also an expert able to identify those 
skins in the courts, because he handled them with me. In that way 
he becomes an expert witness. 

Mr. Scott. He is an expert in so far as he may be required to 
transcribe or to read the notes? 

Mr. Elliott. Yes, sir; and give eveidence bearing upon those 
vital points. 

Mr. Scott. He went with you as a stenographer? 

Mr. Elliott. Yes, sir; as an expert stenographer, not a common 
stenographer. 

Mr. Scott. As a capable and qualified stenographer? 

Mr. Elliott. As one of the best ; yes, sir. 

Mr. Scott. That was the limit, however, of his performing duty? 

Mr. Elliott. Yes, sir. 

Mv. Scott. He was not, in fact, an agent of the committee, as you 
wei: e ? 

^Ir. Elliott. Well, I do not know\ I like to feel that he was my 
equal in the premises, because what he saw and witnessed is vital to 
what I saw and witnessed. 

Mr. Scott. Is that the reason you changed his status in the prep- 
aration of this report from the original i-esolution? 

Mr. Elliott. I do not regard that I changed his status. He was 
ordered to colabor with me. He is a collaborator. 

Mr. Scott. The resolution calls for a qualified stenographer to 
record the details of the information? 

Mr. Elliott. Yes, sir. 



PUR SEAL IjMVEtiTIGATlOX IX ALASKA. 31 

Mr. Scott. So far as yon know, Mr. Gallagher's services were 
confined to the taking down of such dictation as you gave him on 
the islands, all of which is embodied in this report I 

Mr. Elliott. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Scott. And the record of the testimony of those witnesses 
that you have identified? 

Mr. Elliott. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Scott. And witnessing the tagging of the skins? 

Mr. Elliott. Yes, sir; not only witnessing, but to make the notes. 

Mr. Scott. To make a record of the tagging. 

Mr. Elliott. Yes, sir; in the salt house at St. Pauls village in 
cooperation with the officials of the bureau. 

Mr. Scott. When this testimony was taken you say that there 
were nine natives there and the interpreter, and this interpreter 
would finally, after discussing with all of them back and forth, 
crystallize the composite answer of the nine and then would recite 
it to you ? 

Mr. Elliott. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Scott. In taking testimony in that form would there be any 
difficult}^ in you writing down in longhand the answer direct from 
the interpreter? 

Mr. Elliott. I should say so; I would not attem])t to do such a 
thing. 

Mr. Scott. The answers are all very short ? 

Mr. Elliott. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Scott. And all the testimony covers less than two pages? 

Mr. Elliott. Yes, sir ; but we did not know how long the answers 
would he, and no man could tell. I wanted the exact language of 
those people. 

Mr. Scott. As a matter of fact, as you did take that testimony, 
there would have been no difficulty in writing these answers in long- 
hand and doing it in less than 30 minutes? 

Mr. Elliott. I do not laiow any man who is qualified to appear 
as an authority for the answer of another man, who can not take it 
down exactly as it is spoken, and at the moment it is spoken. 

Mr. Scott. When the interpreter finally crystallized in his own 
language the composite answer of the nine witnesses, the short 
answ^er — of course you would have no difficulty in writing out your 
own questions, and the answers, as short as these answers are, " Yes," 
" No," and " We do not remember," none of them probably more 
than a line or so — you would not have any difficulty in writing the 
answers given in that way? 

Mr. Elliott. But you must bear in mind that we could not antici- 
pate that their answers would be short; and we were prepared to take 
anything which came. 

Mr. Scott. You were not anticipating taking the testimony in the 
language of the natives? 

Mr. Elliott. AVe practically got it in their language. That is, 
their language. That is an exact transcript of their language. 

Mr. Scott. Their native tongue? 

Mr. Elliott. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Scott. This is a final interpretation by the interpreter of the 
meaning of the various statements made to him by the nine witnesses? 



32 FUR SEAL INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA. 

Mr. Elliiht. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Scott. Brought under one answer i 

Mr. Elliott. Yes, sir. We did not know what range it might take, 
and we wanted to be read}' to get it. Wq did not solicit, we did not 
qualify, or lead them on; and. we stopped when we ought to have 
stopped. With these questions, now the Attorney General can go 
into any detail he wants. 

Mr. Scott. You arrived in the islands on the 8th of July? 

]Mr. Elliott. We came to anchor there then right off the wharf; 
yes, sir; and went to work the next morning. 

Mr. Scott. Hoav long-Avere vou on the islands? 

Mr. Elliott. Until the 30th of July. 

Mr. Scott. You were busy about 20 days? 

Mr. Elliott. Yes, sir; about 22 days. 

Mr. Sco'rr. I notice that your actual work began on the 10th? 

Mr. Elliott. Yes. sir: but we wei-e pretty bus}^ all day on the 
9th, preceding. 

Mr. Scott. Except in this particular instance, the taking of the 
testimony and your subsequent dictations as you proceeded, the ste- 
nographer was not busy with you? 

Mr. Elliott. Yes. sir: he had to accompany me. We were five 
days going through the journals, a great stack of journals as high as 
that [indicating] : we had to go through all of them. I dictated to 
him wherever we were. 

Here [exhibiting] are the instructions, at least a copy of the letter 
of instructions. The original is in Mr. Fitzgerald's hands. 

Mr. Scott. This is not a copy of the letter of instructions ? 

Mr. Elliott. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Scott. This is apparently a copy of the record. 

Mr. Elliott. That is the way it starts. Here [indicating] is the 
letter of instructions. 

Mr. Scott. I see. Who wrote this letter? 

Mr. Elliott. I do not know ; I was not here. It Avas sent to me 
b}^ mail. I left before it was written. Mr. Rothermel would know. 
It was typeAvritten, and I receiAed it at Seattle June 26. I had no 
time to lose and had to go up there and get in time the clear sailing 
directions, so that we would not lose the Onimak Pass transfer. 

Mr. Scott. Your instructions were to ascertain, " first, the con- 
dition and number of the fur-seal herd as it exists at the height of 
the season on those islands; second, the conduct of the work of kill- 
ing fur seals as annually pursued since 1890 "? 

Mr. Elliott. Yes, sir. 

ISIr. Scott. And the ages and sizes of the seals taken by the lessees 
and agents since that date ; and, third, to procure for the use of the 
committee the SAvorn statements of those men Avho haA^e done the 
Avork of killing. That was some of your directions? 

Mr. Elliott. That is some of it ; yes, sir. 

Mr. Scott. And this report contains all of that information? 

Mr. Elliott. Yes, sir; with reference to the work on the islands. 

Mr. Scott. Now, for the work you did in about 20 days you re- 
quired about 200 days' time in Avhich to submit this report and to 
prepare this supplementary Avork. Was that necessary in order to 
understand what you had stated in this report Avith respect to these 
three points? 



FUR SEAL INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA. 33 

Mr. Elliott. Certtiinly; absolutely; it reached out and branched 
back 40 years, and that was necessary in order to make it perfectly 
clear, leaving no stone unturned and no possible chance to evade or 
doubt or hide. 

Mr. Scott. When was the first mention made of this trip to you, 
and who suggested it? 

Mr. Elliott. Mr. Eotliermel mentioned it to me on the morning of 
June 20 for the first time. 
Mr. Scott. Of 1914? 
Mr. Elliott. June 20, 1913. 

Mr. Scott. Congress was in session at that time, was it not? 
Mr. Elliott. Yes, sir; but there was no quorum pi-esent, and under 
a "gentlemen's agreement" they were adjourning from day to day, 
and there was to be no quorum until the 14th of July. I told Mr. 
Kothermel that that would be too late, and that if it was not done 
before then he had as well stop the whole business. I said that if 
we did not get the testimony of those men up there they would dis- 
appear by the 1st of August, and it would be too late. 

Mr. Scott. Why did you think that they would disappear? 
Mr. Elliott. Because I knew they would be removed, and a new 
set of men would be sent up there, and then we might not get all of 
these past records. 

Mr. ScoiT. Who would remove these men ? 

Mr. Elliott. They were removed. They were removed by act of 
Congress, or they were removed by the Secretary of Commerce. 
Mr. Scott. But the records are still extant ? 

Mr. Elliott. I know ; but, if you have a new set of men up tiiere 
killing seals next year, or have it in charge of other persons, the work 
n'ould be done right, perhaps. But having the old men iq? there, not 
Icnowing that I was coming, it would be done as they had been doing 
it, and I would get a perfect link connecting them with the past. 
Mr. Scott. That evidence, you say, rests in the 400 skins? 
Mr. Elliott. Yes. sir. 

Mr. Scott. And that you regard as the really important part of 
the work ? 

Mr. Elliott. Yes, sir ; and getting the testimony of the natives. I 
could have led them beyond what they said here, perhaps, but that 
would have been wrong. I regard the lining up of these natives there, 
and getting their testimony, getting possession of this evidence of 
fraud, and the uncovering of the killing regulations or orders which 
had been secreted from this committee, as the three vital objects 
attained, and successfully attained, by going as we did. There would 
have been no use in going up there a year later; there would have 
been no use in going after " the height of the season," and there 
would have been no use in waiting until the 14th of July, when there 
would be a quorum in the House, because it was absolutely necessary 
that we should be up there l)etween the 10th and 20th of July. 

Mr. Scott. However, after you returned, was there any exigency or 
emergency that re(}uired this extra work to be done immediately and 
before any authority from Congress could be procured ? 

Mr. Elliott. There had been no suggestion that it was being done 
without authority. The committee did not mention that to me. 
44(5S2— 1(>— .H 



34 FUK SEAL INVKSTIGATION IN ALASKA. 

Mr. Scott, You knew, of course, that 3'our first employment was 
without authority of law? 

Mr. Elliott. No, sir; and I still believe it was with full authority. 

Mr. Scott. But you knew that the House had taken no action on it? 

Mr. luxTOTT. Yes, sir; but that does not signifj'^ anything. That 
has been done before. There are many things that are done without 
the action of the House that have been approved afterwards. 

Mr. Scott. But after you came back and submitted j^our report, at 
the end of a little more than GO days, there was a subsequent em- 
ployment for more than 200 days. Now, that was not occasioned by 
any emergency,. was it? 

Mr. Elliott. Yes, sir; it was the natural sequence of this begin- 
ning. After we closed that up it was necessary for us to get ready in 
order to call these men if they would come. All of them Avere 
particeps criminis to these things, and we had to prepare indict- 
ments of them, and statements of the evidence which they would have 
to face when they came. That was done in this statement of mine, 
but all of them were afraid to come here and meet it, except two. 

Mr. Scott. Still, the Department of .Justice had made no order in 
the premises? 

Mr. Elliott. No, sir. 

Mr. Scott. And, in fact, they had not been consulted ? 

ISIr. Elliott. Why should they be ? We had to get the facts before 
them first. 

Mr. Scott. Don't you understand that it is usual before preparing 
such a case in detail to at least consult the Government? 

]Mr. Elliott. Do you suppose if we should go to the Attorney 
General without any facts, that he would pay any attention to us? 
You try it. 

Mr. Scott. I presume you would have to have some facts, but 
don't you think that the report you submitted to the committee early 
in August contained sufficient facts to at least call the matter to the 
attention of the Attorney General? 

Mr. Elliott. No, sir. He would want these men connected up with 
the fraud and would Avant to know what they said about it. 

Mr. Scott. All of that could have been done after the report had 
been brought to the attention of the House, and then authority could 
have been obtained. 

Mr. Elliott. They did not need any authority. I still do not 
believe that they needed authority. Mr. Mann said on the floor of 
the House that they had perfect authority to make this investigation. 

Mr. Scott. But $10,000 is a considerable sum. 

Mr. Elliott. $10,000,000 is blown away in a breath and you do 
not know anything about it. 

Mr. Scott. I know all about this, though. Who gave you direct 
orders to go on and do this supplemental work after you 'submitted 
this report? 

Mr. Elliott. The chairman. 

Mr. Scott. Mr. Kothermel? 

Mr. Elliott. Yes. sir: and I will say further that I was in con- 
sultation with Mr. Watkins, Mr. Stephens, Mr. Bruckner, and Mr. 
Walsh almost every day. 

Mr. Scott. Did you consult them with reference to this supple- 
mental w^ork ? 



FUR SEAL INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA. 35 

Mr. Elliott. Yes,' sir. 

Mr. Scott. And each of them told you to go on and do the work? 

Mr. Elliott. Yes, sir; they were delighted with it. They were 
pleased with it, and I consulted them and showed them the progress 
that was being made with it. 

Mr. Scott. Was there any discussion as to what the cost of it 
would be? 

Mr. Elliott. No, sir ; I do not think they ever raised that question. 
I can not remember it. I do not remember anything of that, except 
once Avhen Mr. Watkins said, " I hope you will be well paid for this," 
and " we can not pay you enough." 

Mr. Scott. Eeturning again to Mr. Gallagher's bill here, so far as 
you know, the time he devoted to this was slightly over two months? 

Mr. Elliott. It was about 81 or 85 days. He can tell you the 
exact number of days. 

Mr. Scott. That would be approximately at the rate of $1,000 
per month. 

Mr. Elliott. This is the way I figured that : Mr. Gallagher was first 
consulted in the matter on the evening of April 2, 1914, in the com- 
mittee room, and that was the first time he brought up the question 
of compensation. It had been taken up in the committee in the 
morning, and the committee in executive session had ordered the 
chairman to arrange with us for filing our accounts and expenses. 
They made an agreement in that executive session that a certain sum 
should be paid the secretary of Mr. Eothermel — $1,200, I think 

Mr. Scott (interposing). What was that for? 

Mr. Elliott. For extra services. 

Mr. Scott. In connection with this matter? 

Mr. Elliott. Yes, sir. That is all over and p^st. That went 
through the House. 

Mr. Scott. I want to be clear about that. Was the sum allowed 
Miss Kirby in the House for work done in connection with the 
formulation of this report? 

Mr. Elliott. No, sir; not that I know of. That was for services 
in the committee. There is no reference to her services in connection 
with these reports, because she had no hand in it. She typewrote 
the committee's report. She was of no use so far as I was con- 
cerned, and that is all she did. 

Mr. Scott. Now, does this bill cover the services of any other 
person ? 

Mr. Elliott. No, sir. As I said, the committee asked the chairman 
in the morning of April 2, 1914, to arrange with Mr. Gallagher and 
myself as to our compensation, inasmuch as he had no bills from 
us in his hands and as no account had been rendered to him. 

Mr. Scott. Is it the understanding that if this bill is allowed 
you are to pay for the services of anv other person? 

Mr. Elliott. No, sir ; not at all. That was all thrashed out in the 
Committee on Accounts December 5 last. That was sworn testi- 
mony and I wish you would get it. 

Mr. Scott. That was upon what subject? 

Mr. Elliott. On this very subject you are inquiring about, whether 
I made an agreement with anybody to pay them anj'thing. 

Mr. Scott. Is there any understanding that one Mr. Cole is to 
receive any part of this money? 



36 I'^UK S1:AL INVKSTKi.VTIOX IX ALASKA. 

Mr. Elliott. Not from me. 

Mr. Scott. Are you to pay ^Nlr. CoU' for any services in connec- 
tion witli the conmiittee work? 

Mr. Elliott. Not a cent for this work; not a cent. 

Mr. ScoiT. P'or any other work? 

Mr. Elliott. I told him that after this thing was over and the 
business was finished I would reimburse him handsomely for any 
personal service he had done for me in the way of writing letters, 
etc. — not in connection with the committee or this work — but personal 
letters written by him. just as you would call in a stenographer from 
the outside and have him to write your letters. 

Mr. Scott. But was not there some conversation between you and 
Mr. Cole with reference to his being paid by you a considerable sum 
of money — many hundreds of dollars — for work done for Mr. Roth- 
ermel ? 

Mr. ELLiorr. Not a word. 

Mr. Scott, You and he never discussed that? 

Mr. Elliott. No, sir; we never did. He never asked me a ques- 
tion about it, and I volunteered that statement to him. I knew that 
he was hard up. 

Mr. Scott. And you never discussed that subject with Mr. Roth- 
ermel ? 

Mr. Elliott. No, sir; naturally I would not. 

Mr. Scott. So that Mr. Cole's work had nothing to do with any 
part of your work? 

Mr. Elliott. No, sir; not with any part of it. 

Mr. Scott. At any stage of it? 

Mr. Elliott. No, sir. That was finished on the 2d of April, 1914, 
and he could not have had anything to do with it, because he did 
not come to Mr. Rothermel until Ma3\ I never saw him in the field, 
nor did I talk to him about it. It was closed on the 2d of April, 
1914, and I was simply waiting for the minority report. It had not 
appeared, and when it did appear it was nothing but mendacity, 
abuse, and vituperation. 

Mr. Scott. Who made the report? 

Mr. Elliott. Mr. McGuire and Mr. Patton. 

Mr. Scott. I never looked through this. Is it in here? 

Mr. Elliott. Yes, sir. 

Mr. ScoiT. I can not find it in any of these documents. 

Mr. Elliott. Here it is. 

Mr. Scott. Have you the minority report there? 

Mr. Ellioit. No, sir; it was not submitted until July 28; I 
answered it here. It is itemized here. I faced these gentlemen for 
three years and they never made any of those statements to my face, 
and they will never go under oath and make them to my face again, 
either. 

Mr. Scott. I will not bother about that now. I have not read the 
minority report. Has this matter ever been laid before the Depart- 
ment of Justice at all, or do you know ? 

Mr. Stephens. Not that I know of. 

Mr. Elliott. Yes, sir; it was. 

Mr. Scott. I mean the matter of this claim? 

Mr. RoTHEKMEL. Do you mean this claim of Mr. Elliott and Mr. 
Gallagher? 



FUR SEAL INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA. 37 

Mr. Scott. Yes. 

Mr. RoTHERMEL. I spoke to some of the assistants, and they said 
that they had nothing at all to do with it, and that it was for Con- 
gress to fix it. 

Mr. Scott. You see it is quite customary with the Connnittee on 
Claims, when a cla,im is made on account of any matter connected 
with any department, to get the recommendation of that depart- 
ment, and it occurred to me that it was very pertinent that we should 
know whether the Department of Justice would take the responsi- 
bility of recognizing this as necessary work to be done. It might 
be a very important thing, but that is for the Department of Justice 
to say. It is for the Department of Justice to say whether this 
information that was obtained is necessary, whether it can be used 
by the department, and whether it is valuable. 

Mr. Stephens. Mr. Elliott, how many reports did you make to the 
committee with reference to your work in Alaska ? 

Mr. Elliott. All of them are embodied there. 

Mr. Stephens. How many different reports did you make? 

Mr. Elliott. There woidd be three. 

Mr. Stephens. Do you regard this [indicating] as a part of your 
report ? 

Mr. Elliott. That is my report. 

Mr. Stephens. This document containing 848 pages? 

Mr. Elliott. Yes, sir. That is the testimony of the witnesses, and 
we had to do that Avork. 

Mr. Stephens. You collected a lot of letters, newspaper clippings, 
statements of w^itnesses, etc., and incorporated them here? 

Mr. Elliott. There are no new'spaper clippings there. 

Mr. Stephens. I think I remember seeing them. There is a clip- 
ping here from the Washington Star. 

Mr. Elliott. I only bring that in incidentally. 

Mr. Stephens. How long did it take you to prepare this report? 

Mr. Elliott. I was occupied with it incessantly from the time 
I started until the report closed on the 2d of April. 1914. 

Mr. Stephens. Then you made a preliminary report before that. 

Mr. Elliott. That is the one you have been going over. 

Mr. Scott. The real report was made CO daj's aft€r your i-eturn. 

Mr. Stephens. ^IHien was this first report made? 

Mr. Elliott. That was filed with the chairman on August 31. 

Mr. Stephens. Within a verv fcAv days after vour return from 
Alaska? 

Mr. Elliott. Yes. sii*. You see we lost no time in getting these 
things into shape. We did it as quickly as possible. 

Mr. Stephens. Did the committee call upon you to make a sup- 
plementary report? 

Mr. Elliott. Yes, sir; the chairman of the committee said that it 
was necessary that we should go into further detail covering these 
matters, so that when these men appeared before the committee we 
could get their answers and the facts. There were serious charges 
made there. - 

Mr. Rothermel. I suggested that the facts ought to be arranged 
so that they could be more readily understood. I did that because 
this matter has been in a tangle for years and years, and that is the 



38 FUR SEAL INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA. 

reason I suggested that the matters should be analyzed and simpli- 
fied. 

Mr. Stephens. At the time you filed your first report, on the 31st 
of August, all of these other facts were before the committee, were 
they not? 

Mr. Elliott. No, sir. 

Mr. STErjiENs. You had hearings after that? 

Mr. Elliott. Yes, sir; that covers hearings. There was quite a 
series of hearings. 

Mr. Stephens. After the filing of that report? 

Mr. Elliott. Yes, sir; beginning October 13 and ending on March 
19. That l)ecame necessar}^ because the work on the islands opened 
up fresh channels of information. 

Mr. Stephens. We had Mr. Elliott before us yesterday, and he 
went over this matter. Mr. McGuire, do you want to ask some ques- 
tions or make a statement ? 

Mr. McGuiRE. I do not care to ask any questions, but I desire to 
make a statement. 

Mr. Scott. I want to ask Mr. Elliott a few more questions. Now, 
the subsequent work that you did, after the filing of your first re- 
port, is embodied in these two volumes? 

Mr. Elliott. No, sir. There is a syllabus there. While waiting 
for the minority report I made a syllabus of this testimony taken 
during the last hearings. 

Mr. Scott. Then, your subsequent work is embodied in this volume 
of 849 pages entitled " Hearings before the Committee on Expendi- 
tures in the Department of Commerce " ? 

Mr. Elliott. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Scott. Is that the only volume of hearings that was published 
in connection with that investigation? 

Mr. Elliott. No, sir ; the past Congress had another volume. 

Mr. Scott. I refer to this particular investigation. 

Mr. Elliott. Everything is there. That is the syllabus which I 
prepared after the hearings were closed. 

Mr. Scott. This syllabus, so-called, is entitled "A Eeport." This 
contains 260 pages and is based upon the volumes entitled " Hear- 
ings," containing 849 pages? 

Mr. Elliott. These hearings containing 1,100 pages cover the 
whole ground. 

Mr. Scott. This is, in fact, an elaborate brief or argument? 

Mr. Elliott. Yes, sir; prepared for the use of the Attorney 
General. 

Mr. Scott. This document [indicating] was prepared for the use 
of the Attorney General ? 

Mr. Elliott. Yes, sir ; it was not generally distributed. 

Mr. Scott. It was published as a report of the committee ? 

Mr. Elliott. Yes and no, sir; it was published in the name of the 
committee, but not as a report. 

Mr. Scott. The Attorney General had not been consulted in the 
matter at the time this was formulated ? 

Mr. Elliott. No, sir ; he could not have been. 

Mr. Scott. It was submitted to the House as the report of Mr. 
Rothermel and his committee? 

Mr. Elliott. Yes, sir. 



FUR SEAL INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA, 39 

Mr. Scott. And this very large volume of 849 pages AA'as submitted 
by Mr. Rothermel as the hearings of his committee ? 

Mr. Elliott. The sworn testimony. The other is not sworn to. 

Mr. Scott. And the compilation and preparation of these two 
volumes represent the services for which your bill is filed ? 

Mr. Elliott. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Scott. With the exception of the sixty or more days' service 
that' you devoted to obtaining the testimony and preparing the 
original report filed in August? 

Mr. Elliott. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Scott. Will you as clearly and definitely as you can state the 
length of time, after the date on which you submitted this first 
report, that you devoted to this task, up to the time of the submission 
of that report ? Can you state the number of days ? 

Mr. Elliott. Yes, sir; it is from the 31st of August until the 2d 
of April, 1914. I devoted night and day to it. 

Mr. Scott. From the 31st of August, 1913, until the 2d of April, 
1914? 

Mr. Elliott. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Scott. You devoted all of that time to the preparation and 
compilation of these two volumes entitled " Hearings of the Com- 
mittee " and " Report of the Committee " ? 

Mr. Elliott. I could hardly be credited with " compiling " the 
sworn testimony of these men who appeared before the committee. 
I segregated it. I appeared also as a witness, and I brought that 
testimony in. 

Mr. Scott. You brought it in with that which you compiled? 

Mr. Elliott. Yes, sir; this is a resume of it. I did not put any 
charge in for that. 

Mr. Scott. Upon what date did you submit this first report? 

Mr. Elliott. On the 31st of August, 1913. 

Mr. Scott. Were you busy all of the time from June 20 to August 
31 upon that part of the work ? 

Mr. Elliott. Certainly 1 was, every moment. 

Mr. Scott. Was Mr. Gallagher busy with you all of that time ? 

Mr. Elliott. Yes, sir; so far as I knew, he was. 

Mr. Scott. After the filing of that report, do you know of any 
services performed by Mr. Gallagher in connection with this matter, 
except the trip to St. Louis? 

Mr. Elliott. He had to come here and go over these notes, and 
they had to be typewritten. He could not do any typewriting on the 
island, and these notes were transcribed. 

Mr. Scott. That was done before August 31, was it not? 

Mr. Elliott. The notes were not transcribed there. 

Mr. Scott. But he did it before August 31? 

Mr. Elliott. No, sir. This report was not ready for printing 
until along in October. We filed the manuscript and called atten- 
tion to the notes. 

Mr. Scott. He did not file his manuscript or his notes in short- 
hand? 

Mr. Elliott. No, sir; we simply cited the notes. We went to 
work to get the matter in shape, and as soon as we got it in shape 
the committee was called together to receive it — that is, the me- 
chanical part of it. 



40 FUR SKAL INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA. 

Mr. Scott. The mechanical part of it was not very voluminous? 
Mr. P^LLioTT. No, sir; but it had to be done. 
Mr. Scott. But the testimony was not voluminous? 
Mr. P^LLio'iT. You can see what it is. 
Mr. ScoT'r. It is three or four pages of testimony. 
Mr. Elliott. Yes, sir; and many lawyers' briefs would go many 
times over that. 

Mr. Scott. T believe that is all. Mr. Chairman. 

TESTIMONY OF MR. A. F. GALLAGHER. 

(The witness, being first duly sworn, testified as follows:) 
'• Mr. Stephens. Mr. Gallagher, you have a claim against the (xov- 
ernment for something over $3,000. I wish you would state to the 
committee hoAv that claim arises? 

Mr. Gallagher. Perhaps T had better start at the beginning and 
state my connection with the committee? 

Mr. Stephens. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Gallaghei!. In June, 1913, I saw a newspaper article to the 
effect that the Connnittee on P^xpediture in the Department of Com- 
merce was going to make an investigation of the fur-seal conditions 
on the Pribilof Islands. Mr. Rothermel was the chairman of that 
committee, and my home town being Allentown. Pa., which is Mr. 
Rothermel's district, and I being a court reporter with offices in this 
city, I went to Mr. Ilothermel and asked him for the employment to 
report whatever proceedings the committee would i'e({uire i-eported 
while on that trip. 

Mr. Rothermel said that he Avould arrange for the employment, and 
I think it was the -20th of June. 1013, Mr. Rothermel called me up 
on the telephone and told me that the couunittee had decided that in 
view of the conditions in the House at that time the committee itself 
could not go, but they had authority to send agents or somebody to 
rejn-esent them, and he told me then that the committee had taken 
action to send Mr. Elliott and myself up thei-e. I told Mr. Rothermel 
that I would come and see him. I thought the mattei" over and came 
to the conclusion, as I was to go with only one other man and as the 
amount of my comiiensation as reporter would depend on the amount 
of testimony I took, that I did not think it was going to be a paying 
proposition for me. and I went and saw INIr. Rothermel and talked 
with him along that line, and he said, " Never mind; you will be well 
paid. You will be ])aid as an agent of the committee." I accepted 
the employment upon those terms. 

Mr. Stephens, Was there any mention made of what the compen- 
sation would be? 

Mr. Gallagher. There was not, sir, except that I would be well 
paid. I also understood from what Mr. Rothermel said that my 
expenses would be paid on a mileage basis of 10 cents a mile. In 
view of that statement, I kept no expense account — no detailed ex- 
pense account — and could only estimate it. 

Mr. Stephens. What is the amount of the account vou filed? 
Three thousand three hundred and .some odd dollars? 

Mr. Gallagher. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Stephens. How do you figure out that amount? 



FUK SEAL INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA. • 41 

Mr. Gallagher. IS'lr. Cliairnmii, 1 should like to say right here 
that I am not here trying to justify that amount, but I am here try- 
ing to fix on some amount. I have never adhered to any particular 
figure in this matter, and always told Mr. Kothermel that I was 
willing to agree on any figure that anybody fixed as reasonable. I 
also made that statement before the Committee on Accounts. 

Mr. Stephens. We should like to have the benefit of your judg- 
ment as to what is reasonable for the services rendered? 

Mr. Gallagher. Of course, in this matter of compensation I take 
into consideration a lot of things that I do not seem to be able to 
make other people take into consideration. If you should ask me 
how many days I was employed on the work I would say 80 days, ap- 
proximately; but here are two days which, if I had not been engaged 
on this particular work, I would not have lost my present employ- 
ment; and there have been days out of number that I have spent 
around the committee on the same proposition. 

Mr. Stephens. We can not consider to-day, nor yesterday, nor any 
other day except those on which you were actually engaged in this 
work. 

Mr. Gallagher. I understand. 

Mr. Stephens. We can not pay you for making an effort to collect 
what you think is due you. 

Mr. Gallagher. I want to make a statement right here. If I were 
paid the full amount called for in the resolution I would not consider 
myself overpaid. 

'Mr. Stephens, For the 80 days si:)ent on the Avork? 

Mr. Gallagher. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Scott. Is there any legal provision for a per diem for court 
reporters in the District of Columbia ? 

Mr. Gallagher. No, sir. Now, there is one way in wdiich I might 
arrive at the amount. In the last year, 1914, I earned $0,200. and 
I suppose I made that amount in about nine months' work. For 865 
days that would be approximately $17 a day. 

Mr. Stephens. But you are charging nearly twice that much here? 

Mr. Gallagher. Yes, sir. I had no positive understanding with 
anybody as to how much I was to receive for doing this work, and 
after having completed the work I asked Mr. Elliott one evening 
what he thought, he know ing what I had done, would be a reasonable 
compensation for me. and he said '" $3,500," and I said " All right." 
That is the way the $3,500 was arrived at — without any itemization 
or anything of that kind at all. 

Mr. Stephens. You have not answered the question as to what is 
your best judgment as to the amount which should be paid. You 
have just stated that you fixed the amount at $3,500. because Mr. 
Elliott made that suggestion to you? 

Mr. Gallagher. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Stephens. You have also stated that you made an average of 
about $17 a day during the last year? 

Mr. Gallagher. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Stephens. While engaged on other work; but you have not 
answered the question as to how much you should be paid for this 
particular work, the 80 days you were actually engaged on it? 

Mr. Gallagher. I consider this particular work more unpleasant 
and more hazardous than my daily employment. If I had had as 



42 FUR SEAL INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA. 

much foresight as hindsight, I would not have become connected 
with it for anything. 1 have not answered your question yet. Take 
the figure which is fixed by the House of Representatives as compen- 
sation for stenographic work, which is $5,000 a year, the reporters 
in the House of Representatives do not work every day in the year, 
but let us say $20 a da,v for the days they work — if I received $20 a 
day for 75 days, to make it sure, I would be satisfied. 
. Mr. Scott. That is $1,500? 

Mr. Gallagher. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Stephens. What was the amount of your expenses in making 
this trip? 

Mr. Gallagher. As I said, I did not keep a detailed expense ac- 
count. I tried to approach it, and I estimated some $+50, but I do 
not believe that will cover it. 

Mr. Elliott. It cost me $500, but I could itemize only $467. 

Mr. Stephens. You left here on the 20th of June, 1913? 

Mr. Gallagher. No, sir; I left on the 22d day of June, 1913. 

Mr. Stephens. When did you return? 

Mr. Gallagher. On the 21st of August, 1913. 

Mr. Stephens. How many days did you spend on this work after 
your return from Alaska? 

Mr. Gallagher. I spent every day in connection with this work 
up until the 3d of September, when I signed the report. I not' only 
spent my own time, but I employed typewriters to do the work. Mr. 
Scott seems to think that there was no typewriting done. I paid a bill 
of $19.60, which would indicate 196 typewritten pages. 

Mr. Scott. That included the copying of the exhibits and the mat- 
ter prepared by Mr. Elliott? 

Mr. Gallagher. No, sir; it did not. It included what I took right 
up on the islands. 

Mr. Elliott. The Avork you refer to I did in longhand. 

Mr. Stephens. You took 196 pages of testimony in Alaska ? 

Mr. Gallagher. Not testimony ; but testimony and other matter. 

Mr. Stephens. Documentary papers? 

Mr. Gallagher. Yes, sir. I went with Mr. Elliott all over the 
different rookeries and took notes at his dictation. 

Mr. Elliott. Let me say that as we went along I dictated and 
Mr. Gallagher took it right down, and that is an exact transcript. 
When the wnnd is blowing and the rain is falling it is almost impos- 
sible to make notes there, and at night we would come in late, worn 
out and tired out, and get up early the next morning, and so there 
was no time to transcribe anything there. 

Mr. Stephens. Is there anything else which you would like to say 
to the committee, Mr. Gallagher? 

Mr. Gallagher. I would like to say that by making the trip to 
St. Louis at the time I did I suffered a loss of between $500 and $700. 

Mr. Stephens. When was the trip made? 

Mr. Gallagher. In November, 1913. 

Mr. Stephens. How long did 3^ou remain there? 

Mr. Gallagher. Five days. 

Mr. Stephens That is all the work you did for the committee after 
the 3d of September in regard to this matter? 

Mr. Gallagher. I appeared before the committee and testified. 

Mr. Stephens. As a witness you made a statement ? 



FUR SEAL INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA, 43 

Mr. Gallagher. Yes, sir. I also came up here at other times when 
other people were testifying, because I was wanted, and I also con- 
ferred with the chairman of the committee at various times, all of 
which took my time. 

Mr. Scott. When did you go to St. Louis ? 

Mr. Gallagher. I believe I went to St. Louis on November 19, 
1913. The trip covered nine days in the middle of November, 1913. 

Mr. ScoTT. What did you do after you arrived there; what par- 
ticular service did you render? 

Mr. Gallagher. After I arrived there I went to the fur house of 
Funsten Bros. & Co. Funsten Bros. & Co. had then received a 
shipment of approximately 2,200 sealskins from the islands, rep- 
resenting the catch of that season, I believe. Among those 2,200 
skins were 400 skins on which a test had been made on the islands 
as to the weights, measurements, etc. I was sent down there to 
separate those 400 skins from the balance of the 2,200 skins. 

Mr. ScoTT. Were those 400 skins baled ? 

Mr. Gallagher. Bundled; yes, sir. 

Mr. ScoTT. Bundled together? 

Mr. Gallagher. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Scott. Were they all in one bundle? 

Mr. Gallagher. No, sir; there were two skins in each bundle. 

Mr. Scott. They were not baled in large bundles ? 

Mr. Gallagher. No, sir ; two skins in each bundle. 

Mr. Scott. Those skins were labeled — the bundles were labeled? 

Mr. Gallagher. The bundles were not labeled on the outside, but 
each skin was tagged on the inside separately, the tag being hidden, 
and we had to open the whole 2,200 skins in order to find the 400 
that we wanted to identify. 

Mr. Scott. They were put in indiscriminately ? 

Mr. Gallagher. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Scott. Why were not those skins separated; why were they 
not separated after they had been tagged and inspected in Alaska, 
do you know? 

Mr. Gallagher. No, sir ; I do not laiow. 

Mr. Elliott. Will you permit me to answer that question ? 

Mr. Scott. Certainly. 

Mr. Elliott. Because, if we had given the faintest hint of what 
we were going to do, they would have opened them and destroyed the 
evidence. 

Mr. Scott. You suspected that they might do so ? 

Mr. Elliott. Yes, sir. That is the reason we had no outward sign 
given to those people. I was going to claim those skins. Then I 
went to the Secretary of Commerce and he cooperated with me and 
we got them. 

Mr. Gallagher. Mr. Scott, you tried to show during your exami- 
nation of Mr. Elliott that my work apparently did not amount to 
very much. I think that is outside the question. I think if I made 
that trip and did not do a single minute's work, the fact that I gave 
my time to the committee and accepted the employment in good faith 
justifies me in seeking compensation. 

Mr. Rothermel. May I ask the witness a question ? 

Mr. Stephens. Certainly. 



44 FUR SKAL INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA. 

Mr. KoTJiEK.MEL. You went to St. Louis at the suggestion of the 
Secretiirv of Conunerce? 

Mr. (;ALLA<iJiKU. Well, I did not know that at the time I went 
down there with you. I thought I was accepting employment from 
the committee. 

Mr. lioTiiEKMEL. On that trip to St. Louis there was a uian from 
the department:? 

Mr. GALLA(inEu. Yes, sir; a gentleman froui the Department of 
Connnerce accompanied me. 

]Mr. Stephens. Mi-. Scott asked Mr. Elliott a few moments ago 
about the comi)ensation of JNIr. Cole. I want to ask you whether or 
not you know anything about Mr. Cole's connection with this affair 
and any agi'eement to compensate him? 

Mr. (jALLAGiiEit. i\Ir. Chairman, that same question was asked me 
before the Committee on Accounts, and I can only answer in the 
same way. that on the 5th of August, I believe, after this report of 
the committee was submitted to the House, Mr. Rothermel, Mr. 
Elliott, and I got together in Mr. Rothermel's room and conferred 
upon this question of compensation, and Mr. Elliott at that time said 
to Mr. Rothermel: "There will be no clerk business in this; I will 
take care of Charlie." 
Mr. Scott. Who said that? 
Mr. Gallagher. Mr. Elliott. 
Mr. Si'EPHENS. Who is Charlie? 
Mr. Gallagher. Mr. Cole. 
Mr. Scott. This Mr. Cole, here? 
Mr. Gallagher. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Stephens. He was employed there by the committee? 
Mr. Gallagher. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Stephens. And he worked in the committee room ? 
Mr. Gallagher. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Stephens. And Mr. Elliott's statement was that there would 
be no clerk hire in this; that he would take care of Charlie? 

Mr.^ Gallagher. That there wonld be no clerk's business in this, 
Mr. Elliott having in mind the Kirby matter. 

Mr. Stephens. Did Mr. Elliott ever mention Mr. Cole to you in 
regard to his pay, and so on? 

Mr. Gallagher. Mr. Elliott did, but he never led me to believe 
that he was going to give him any great sum. Mr. Cole always told 
me that Mr. Elliott had agreed to pay him as clerk of the committee, 
but I always felt in my own mind that there was some variance be- 
tween Mr. p:ili()tt and Mr. Cole as to what Mr. Elliott Avas to pay 
Mr. Cole. 

Mr. Stephens. Mr. Elliott never made anv statement to you as to 
the amount he was to pay? 
Mr. Gallagher. Xo, sir. 
Mr. Elliott. May I say one word there? 
Mr. Stephens, (^ertainly you may. 

Mr. Elliott. AYhen the statement was made to which Mr. Galla- 
gher refers, which is entirely correct— it was not " I will take care 
of Charlie." l)ut it was "We will take care of Charlie"— I had refer- 
ence at that time to the fact that Charlie Avas an applicant for a 
position in the Department of Commerce in Alaska, and three letters 
had been written, one by Mr. Rothermel, one by Mr. Palmer, and 



FUR SEAt. INVESTKiATTON IN ALASKA. 45 

one by Mr. Lee, urging his appointment as an agent of the sahnon 
fisheries, and I told Charlie when this thing was over I would go 
up there and personally see Mr. Redfield and urge his appointment. 
That is what I meant by taking care of Charlie, plus anything else 
I might do for him, which w^ould be a small matter. That is the 
matter I had in mind about taking care of him, getting him a job. 

Mr. Scott. How did that matter become pertinent to the conversa- 
tion you were having at the time? 

Mr. Elliott. It had reference to the fact that Charlie was without 
means and needed something that would help him. 

Mr. Scott. He had been acting as clerk of the committee for some 
time ? 

Mr. Elliott. I do not knoAv whether he was acting clerk of the 
committee. 

Mr. Scott. He had been present? 

Mr. Elliott. Yes, sir; as Mr. Rothermel's secretary. T never 
heard him called the clerk. 

Mr. Scott. As his secretary? 

Mr. Elliott. Yes, sir. I never had any conversation with Mr. 
Rothermel about Charlie, what he was paying him, or anything: I 
never asked him a question and Charlie never told me. 

Mr. Stepiiexs. Was there any other secretary to the committee at 
that time? 

Mr. Elliott. Not at that time. 

Mr. Scott. In your conversation with Mr. E^lliott you came to a 
tentative agreement as to the amount that each man was to be 
allowed and the figures were taken to Mr. Watkins to get his 
opinion ? 

Mr. Gallagher. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Scott. AVhat was the amount that was to be apportioned to 
each man under that tentative agreement? 

Mr. Gallagher. Well, I only know directly about my own, Mr. 
Scott, I know by hearsay what Mr. Cole carried down there — what 
Mr. Cole told me himself. 

Mr. Scott. You were present at that time ? 

Mr. Gallagher. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Scott. What was the arrangement, temporary, tentative, of 
course ? 

Mr. Rotheriniel. At whose instance did he carry it to Mr. 
Watkins? 

Mr. Gallagher. I do not know at whose instance. 

Mr. Scott. You were talking, free and easy, among yourselves? 

Mr. Gallagher. I have an idea now that Mr. Elliott, as a matter 
of compensation, was to get $5,000, and later he told me that he 
alwavs intended to include $1,000 for his expenses in addition to 
that." 

Mr. Scott. It was subsequently raised to $6,000? 

Mr. Gallagher. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Scott. Is it not a fact that out of the $1,000 he was to take 
care of Cole's work for the committee, did you so understand it? 

Mr. Gallagher. I so understood from Mr. Cole, but the statement 
was never made to me by Mr. Elliott. 

Mr. Scorr. Was there any explanation ever made for the raise 
from $5,000 to $6,000 to you or in your presence? 



46 FUR SEAL INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA. 

Mr. Gallagher. Mr. Elliott said that the $1,000 was to cover his 
expenses. 

Mr. Scott. What expense do j^ou mean ; car fare, etc. ? 

Mr. Gallagher. Yes, sir; the expenses of the trip. 

Mr. Scott. Do you know what IBgures Mr. Cole took down to Mr, 
Watkiiis for approval? 

Mr. Gallagher. I do not think that I could testify from my own 
knowledge, except I know Mr. Cole told me that there was $8,500 on 
on the slip. 

Mr. Scott. And that was to cover everybody ? 

Mr. Gallagher. Yes, sir. 

IVIr. Stephens. When did he go down to see Mr. Watkins — imme- 
diately after you gentlemen had this conversation in regard to 
compensation, which you have already referred to? 

Mr. Gallagher. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Stephens. In that conversation which you gentlemen had 
was $8,500 the amount agreed upon, or what was the amount actually 
agreed upon? 

Mr. Gallagher. I do not like to testify positively about Mr. 
Elliott's compensation. He never did mention the fact of the amount 
of money that he was to receive in any way at that particular time. 
I had an idea that he was to get $5,000. I think that w\is to cover 
everything. He told me later that there was $1,000 additional, which 
was to cover his expenses. 

Mr. Stephens. What sum was mentioned in the conversation when 
you were discussing compensation? 

Mr. Gallagher. As I recall, $8,500 was mentioned. 

Mr. Stephens. The very amount which Mr. Cole told you he took 
to Mr. Watkins? 

Mr. Gallagher. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rothermel. I want to ask a question. 

Mr. Stephens. Certainly. 

Mr. RoTHERiMEL. The committee had instructed me to get the bills 
from you and Mr. Elliott. How did it happen that they were sub- 
mitted to Mr. Watkins ? That is what I do not understand. This is 
the first that I have heard about it. 

Mr. Gallagher. I remember Mr. Cole going out of the room with 
a slip and coming back and saying that he had been down to see Mr. 
Watkins. I do not recall that he said what Mr. Watkins told him. 

Mr. Rothermel. This is the first time that I have ever heard of 
that. 

Mr. Gallagher. INIr. Cole evidently supposed that he had some 
financial interest in the matter, because he took a particular interest 
in it. 

Mr. Stephens. Did he engage in the conA'ersation with you when 
you discussed the compensation — Mr. Cole, I mean? 

Mr. Gallagher. I do not remember, Mr! Chairman. 

Mr. Stephens. He was in the room? 

Mr. Gallagher. Yes, sir. Then he took this paper and went out. 

Mr. Scott. Did the conversation had at that time and place be- 
tween you and Mr. Elliott in the presence of ^Mr. Cole leave you 
with the impression that Mr. Cole was to receive a part of the ag- 
gregate of $8,500? 



FUE SEAL INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA. 47 

Mr. Gallagher. j\fi-. Cole always told me, and I had an idea that 
he was to be compensated by Mr. Elliott. To what extent I do not 
know. 

Mr. Scott. The question is, did that conversation there leave you 
then with the impression that part of the $8,500 was to go to Mr. 
Cole ; some part of it ? 

Mr- Gallagher. I would say, yes; although that is a hard ques- 
tion to answer. Having been told by Mr. Cole that he was to be 
paid by Mr. Elliott, and having been told also by Mr. Elliott that 
he was going to give Charlie some compensation, I do not know that 
I could separate that. 

Mr. RoTHERMEL. Let me say this: The committee had instructed 
me to inform Mr. Elliott and Mr. Gallagher to submit their bills, 
and it was immaterial to me as to the amount because that was 
to be left open to be passed on by the committee, and if anything 
had been said in my presence I would not have tolerated it for a 
minute. That is the truth. I had an understanding with Mr. Cole 
and he was regularly paid for being in the room. 

Mr. Scott. He had already been regularly paid? 

Mr. RoTHERMEL. Ycs, sir ; on tlie contract he had with me. I 
only say this to refresh Mr. Gallagher's recollection. 

Mr. Gallagher. I want to say in view of Mr. Rothermel's sugges- 
tion that I. always hand an entire misconception of this thing. The 
committee having employed me, through Mr. Rothermel as chair- 
man, I thought when it came to the matter of compensation that 
Mr. Rothermel, as chairman, could fix the compensation. When 
Mr. Elliott suggested $3,500, I said, "All right." 

Mr. Elliott. I might say that that suggestion was made on April 
2, 1914, at night? 

Mr. Gallagher. It was the same night after Mr, Rothermel had 
called me up during the day. 

Mr. Elliott. When was that? 

Mr. Gallagher. You said that it was April 2. 

Mr. Elliott. Yes; at night, was it not? 

Mr. Gallagher. About that time. 

Mr. Elliott. Then we remarked upon the sums. I was to have 
$5,000 and $1,000 for living and traveling expenses, and you were 
to have $3,500, and Mr. Rothermel made a pencil note in order to 
draw up the resolution, and I asked him to hold it until the minority 
report was filed, and you agreed. 

Mr. Gallagher. I agreed to anything. 

Mr. Elliott. That agreement for $9,500 was made April 2, 1914. 

Mr. Stephens. Do you wish to say an3'thing further, Mr. Gal- 
lagher ? 

Mr. Gallagher. I should like to submit now the figure to which 
I think I am entitled. I think, to make matters sure, that I spent 
at least 75 days on this work, and at $20 a day that would be $1,500, 
and I think I actuallv spent $500 for expenses. 

Mr. Stephens. Making $2,000? 

Mr. Gallagher. Yes. sir ; making $2,000. I have never been re- 
imbursed for 1 cent of my expenses. I do not want to lose any 
more time about this matter, and if the committee does not see fit 
to pay me, wipe it off. I do not want to be running around and 



48 FUR SKA I. INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA. 

havin<2; these |)eop]e call me on the telephone to come to committee 
meetin<rs niul liang around here. If it is not satisfactory, wipe it off. 
I (lid not know that I was accepting employment on a gamble or I 
would not have made as much noise as I have. 

Mr. Stkpiiexs. If yon have nothing further to say, Mr. Gallagher, 
-we will excuse you and promise that this committee will not call you 
again. 

STATEMENT OF HON. BIRD McGUIRE, A REPRESENTATIVE IN 
CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF OKLAHOMA. 

Mr. Stepiikns. Mr. McGuire. we should like to have you make your 
statement in your own way, and if we Avant to interrogate you per- 
haps we will do so later. 

Mr. Mc(ii'iRE. Mr. Chairman and gentlemen of the subcommittee, 
I have been one of the members of the Committee on Expenditures 
in the Department of Commerce since these hearings began. There 
was an investigation in 1911 on charges preferred by Mr. Elliott. 
Mr. Madden, of Illinois, and myself were the minority members of 
the committee at that time. Everything was completed, the majority 
report was filed, and the minority presented its views, and Ave closed 
the hearings — closed anything. The committee then changed to some 
extent, and Mr. Patton, of Pennsylvania, came on the committee. 

Mr. RoTiiERMEL. May I suggest that Mr. Patton w^as a member of 
the committee in the previous Congress and that there were three of 
you ? 

Mr. McGuiRE, Maybe that was it. Mr. Madden went off the com- 
mittee; perhaps that would be better. 

The committee, as Ave vieAved it at that time, without any authority 
Avhatever under the rules of the House, and in face of the fact that 
thei-e had been exhaustiAe hearings and all of the reports had been 
filed, proceeded again with another hearing. That was o\'er the 
protest of Mr. Patton and myself. 

We are making the contention that there was absolutely no author- 
ity AvhatcAer given by the House, and there Avas not; that the com- 
mittee A\as acting outside of and beyond its jurisdiction; that as a 
matter of laAv there Avas no right, and that as a matter of fact there 
was no occasion for anything of the kind. The hearings had been 
so exhaustive — and Mr. Elliott's statements seemed to be the storm 
center of misinformation and of contradiction with himself — that 
Ave really ti'ied to prevent any further iuA'estigation. Seemingly he 
took charge of the committee room, and I could not call up the com- 
mittee over the phone that he did not ansAver. He Avas ahvays there 
and always in charge, and he Avas the man who had made the charges 
of fraud in Alaska. I have abundant evidence that he wrote this 
report, and I think he did. 

IVIr. ScoiT. "\Miich report do you refer to? 

Mr. McGuTRE. The majority report. 

Mr. Scott. He has said that he did. 

Mr. McGuiRE. He said that he Avrote the report. 

Mr. Scott. I understood you to say that you prepared the report. 

Mr. Elliott. That was this report [indicating]. 

Mr. McGuiRE. Here was the man who preferred the charges, a 
man discredited, as I Avill show you by quotations from leading men 



FUR SEAL INVESTKiATION IN ALASKA. 49 

of the country, froin'Kepiiblic;uis and Democrats alike, and who, in 
my judgment, had discredited himself in a hundred diti'erent ways 
in his testimon^^ — it is the most reckless testimony that I ever heard 
in my life — yet, this man was sent wrongfully and unlawfully by the 
committee to investigate his own charges, liis own testimony states 
that he Avas told to remain away from the Government officials on 
the island. I will not go into the details, but such facts as were re- 
ported by him after he returned with respect to the number of seals 
corroborated exactly the department officials theretofore, and then 
contradicted himself completely and thoroughly. The only reliable 
fact he obtained, in my judgment, in view of all the evidence — and 
I have heard this evidence time and again — as I say, the only fact 
that he obtained while up there was what ever^'body but Elliott 
knew, and that was as to the a[)proximate number of seals. 

Now, I want to read a few documents, gentlemen, in part contra- 
dictory of Mr. Elliott's statements here. These documents, taken in 
connection with other things which I know bearing upon the same 
question as to the employment of various persons before the com- 
mittee, will disclose to some extent the lamentable state of affairs that 
existed in that committee. I will now read yofl from this communi- 
cation which is addressed to myself: 

Confiruiing luy conversation with .von this afternoon in reference to my con- 
nection with the Connnittee on Expenditures in the Department of Commerce, of 
whicli connnittee yon are a member and wliicli I served as its clerli. I desire 
t«» say that during my service ilr. Uotliermel ns cliairman did very little in 
reference to tl\e worlv of the investigation of the fur-seal matter. 

Mr. H. W. Elliott, I am prepared to say. wrote up the report of the chairman, 
and it was then sent to Miss Clara Young, at Reading, who copied it on the 
typewriter and returned it to Mr. Rothermel. 

Now, gentlemen, the man who preferred the charges, the man who 
was selected to go up there, and the man who compiled all of this 
stuff, which is largely a repetition of what he has said heretofore and 
put in the record himself, wrote the report, according to this state- 
ment. The letter continues: 

After same was received by him he looked over it and requested me to 
insert some parts of the henrings, ami which Mr. Elliott suggested as he was 
better familiar with it he would do it, and he did. I then handed to several of 
the newspapers copies of it, and the original Mr. Rothermel kept and presented 
it to the House for action, and I have since learned that no action was taken 
by the House. After it was discovered that the House took no action Mr. 
Rothermel went to see the Attorney General with the suggestion that he should 
bring suit against the lessees of the seal islands. The matter was also taken 
up by me, at Mr. Rothermel's suggestion, with the Secretary of Connnerce, so 
that he would act in conjunction with the Attorney General, and Mr. Redfield, 
in a letter to either Mr. Rothermel or Mr. Elliott, stated that he could do 
nothing as no congi'essional action was taken. 

Mr. Elliott then got busy and wrote several letters in longhand addressed to 
the Attorney General and the Secretary of Commerce, and I copied them on the 
typewriter, and Mr. Rothermel signed them as chairman of the connnittee. 
Mr. Elliott also made several trips in person to the Attorney General and to 
Secretary Redfield, and I think that on one of these trips he was accompanied 
by Mr. Gallagher. In the report to Hon. James T. Lloyd, chairman of the 
Committee on Accounts which was considei-ing the jiayment of the $9,500 
resolution. Mr. Elliott also wrote the letter, aiul Mr. Rothermel signed it. to 
show the Committee on Accounts the great work that was accomplished by Mr. 
Elliott and IMr. Gallagher in going to Alaska and stating a lunnber of other 
i-easons slating why his (Mr. Lloyd's) committee should pass favorably upon 
the payment of same. 
44682— l(j 4 



50 l^UR SEAL INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA. 

Tliere vore quite a number of various reports that were jjotten up for the 
inajority iiu'iiiluMs of tlio coniinilteo. which I wrote on the typewriter under 
instuotioiis from Elliott, and Mr. Rothermol signing same as chairman. Mr. 
lOUiott has a key to the committee room, and during my seven months' service 
he was tlie whole thing. 
Sincerely, yours, 

Chas. L. Cole. 

Mr. RoTHERMFx. May I ask a question there, Mr. Chairman? 

Mr. Stephens. Certainly. 

Mr. RoTHEKMEL. Did you read the letter to Mr. Lloyd, in which I 
asked him to pass favorably on this bill? 

Mr. McGuiKE. I did not even know you wrote a letter. 

Mr. RoTiiERMEL. You said it was signed by me. 

Mr. McGuiRE. I have been reading Mr. Cole's letter. 

Mv. RoTHERMEL. Did you see a letter to Mr. Lloyd which I signed, 
asking him to pass favorably upon this bill? 

Mr. McGuiRE. I did not say that I saw any letter. I was reading 
Mr. Cole's letter, and I have some other letters I would like to read 
in that connection. 

Mr. RoTHERMEL. Did you say you did not see such a letter? 

Mr. McGuiRE. I have already said I did not see any letter. I am 
reading Mr. Cole's statement made in a letter to me. I do not know 
what the purpose of the gentleman is in asking the question. 

Mr. RoTHERMEL. The purpose was to see whether there was any 
evidence outside of this. 

Mv. McGuiRE. Here is another letter. This letter is dated January 
5, 1914. The other letter was dated January 4, 1914. Gentlemen of 
the committee, I regret anything of this kind, but I think I have a 
dut}'^ to perform, and I have seen so much of this matter that it seems 
to me Congress is entitled to know some of the facts, for whatever the 
facts may be worth to us. This letter, which is dated January 5, 
1914, is addressed to " Hon. Bird S. McGuire, House of Representa- 
tives, Washington, D. C.," and it says : 

Confirming my conversation witli you this afternoon in reference to the 
Kathryn Kirby matter — 

that is the Miss Kirby who is now Mrs. Hummel and who was at one 
time employed by the committee— 

I desire to say that on or about April 23, 1914, Representative John H. Rother- 
mel gave me a check for $50 on the National Capital Bank and asked me to go 
to the office of the Sergeant at Arms and get him the cash, which I did. Upon 
my return I found that Miss Kirby was with him, and after I handed Mr. 
Rotherniel the .$50 he handed same to Miss Kirby. at the same time asking her 
to sign a paper which he handed her. Miss Kirby glanced at the paper and then 
refused to sign it, whereupon Mr. Rotherniel stated to her that tlien she could 
not have the $50. She stated that under no circumstances would she sign the 
paper, and she then left the office and Mr. Rotherniel kept the $50. I did not 
know at the time what she was supposed to sign, but later on I met Miss Kirby 
and asked her in reference to the matter and she told nie that the paper that 
Mr. Rotherniel requested her to sign was a receipt dated oack six weeks, which, 
if she signed, would make it appear that he (Mr. Rotherniel) had paid her 
everything he owed her up to date, and appearing as it did it would lead people, 
and especially Members of Congress, to believe that the statements she made 
before the Committee on Accounts prior to the paying her of the $1,200 were 
untrue and that she had been paid everything that Mv. Rothermel owed her up 
to April 23 appear as to have been paid her six weeks before. 

I remember very well the whole transaction, because Mr. Rotherniel remarked 
to me after Miss Kirby left that I was a witness to the transaction and saw 



FUR SEAL INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA. 51 

that she refused to accept the money. Mr. Rotherrael never showed me the 
paper that he wanted her to sign, nor informed me as to its contents, wliich I 
afterwards learned from Miss Kirby herself. 
Very respectfully, 

Chas. L. Cole. 

Mr. EoTHERMEL. May I ask a question right there ? 

Mr. Stephens. Certainly. 

Mr. EoTiiERMEL. Are you aware of the fact, Mr. McGuire, that 
Miss Kirby had been regularly paid by me, according to an under- 
standing we had ? Did you not hear that in the House ? 

Mr. McGuiRE. I heard that statement, Mr. Kothermel; something 
to that effect. 

Mr. RoTHERMEL. And did not Mr. Lloyd state that she told him she 
had been regularly paid? 

Mr. McGuiRE. Had you paid her at thait time? 

Mr. RoTHERMEL. Yes, sir. 

Mr. McGuiRE. You had completely paid her at that time? 

Mr. RoTMERMEL. Yes. Now, there is just one more question I 
want to ask. I want to clear up some things here so that you will see 
what some people say who are hanging around here. 

Mr. McGuire, on the 23d of April I offered her the $50 a week 
in advance and asked her to sign a receipt in full. She walked out 
and refused. I have the papers in my office in regard to that. I 
offered her $50 a week in advance, and Judge Watkins knows it. 
There is not a word of truth in what you get from Mr. Cole. 

Mr. McGuiRE. I believe you said you had paid Miss Kirby at that 
time? 

Mr. RoTHERMEL. Yes ; except the last month, and that I offered 
her on the 23d, which was several days before she was entitled to the 
money, according to contract. 

Mr. McGuiRE. Then you had not paid her all. When did you pay 
her the last payment ? Have you ever paid her ? 

Mr. RoTHERMEL. YcS. 

Mr. McGuiRE. When? 

Mr. RoTHERMEL. A wcck or two ago. She said Mr. Cole went to 
see her and asked her whether or not she would not testify against 
me, according to the story he has told you here. 

Mr. McGuiRE. I have another letter from Mrs. Hummel which 
states the facts with reference to the last payment. There was $50 
paid a few days ago. I have the letter from Mrs. Hummel that 
would be very interesting to the committee, I am sure. I thought I 
had it here, and I had intended to read it in connection with the 
other letter, and that was the only purpose I had in reading the other 
letter. I do not seem to have Mrs. Hummel's letter here with me, 
and I want to ask leave to file that letter with the committee. I have 
it in my office. I thought I had it here. It is simply a statement of 
what transpired the other day when the $50 was paid. 

Mr. Stephens. I do not exactly see the pertinence of this matter 
in connection with the question under investigation at the present 
time. 

Mr. McGuiRE. It might be regarded as irrelevant, but I will say 
this, that I will make a statement on the floor of the House, and I 
think I will be able to prove what the relations of the chairman of 



52 I'Uli SHAL INVKSTIGATION IX ALASKA. 

the c'oinniittcc with this man have been; that they have been rather 
stran<>e for a man who lias pi-ef erred chartjes ajjainst (Government 
otlicials. I sliall make a statement that he retained a Key to that 
office. I shall mal<e a statement on the floor of the House that the 
evidence is that he wrote the re[)orts, based on his own charji:es and 
liis own in\esti<iati()n. 

Mr. Stkpmens. I understand that, but I Avas si)eakin<T particularly 
in rejzard to his paying or not paying Miss Kirby, and his dealings 
with her. 

Mr. McGuiHE. I onl_y brought that in. as I say, in order to show 
something in regard to the controversy — and there is a controversy 
between Mr. P^lliott and Mr. Cole, and I simi)ly brought it in as a 
matter, you might say, of impeachment, and Miss Kirby's lettei- 
may disclose my purpose. It is simply a (piestion of impeachment 
of Mr. Elliott. T want to show that he has contradicted everybody 
who comes in contact or conflict with him. if they do not agree with 
him. 

Mr. Stephens. That Mr. Elliott does that? 

Mr. McGiHRE. Yes. Now, then, he has made a statement here 
at great length as to what he has accomplished and what he has done. 
My position, of course, is that there is not any yiavt of that which is 
very true. He assumes in his statement made here that there is 
great fraud, and all that sort of thing. P^xactly the opjjosite is true. 

Mr. Stephens. Of course this committee is not bound by the strict 
rules of law and evidence as a lawyer would be if he were trying a 
case in court, but it seems to me it Avould be better to have Mr. Cole 
make his own statement rather than read letters he has written, and 
that it would be better to let Miss Kirby make her own statement 
rather than read into the record statements she has prepared and 
sent in by means of a tetter. Do you not think that would be better? 

Mr. McGuiiiE. As a matter of strict evidence, certainly. 

Mr. Stephens. As a matter of strict evidence, it would have to 
be that Avay. 

Mr. McGuire. I was simply proceeding on the theory that from 
a moral point of view and from a legal point of view, this bill, so 
far as Mr. P^lliott is concerned, should not be paid. 

I am proceeding on the theory that Mr. Elliott is unworthy of 
belief. I brought these things in for purposes of impeachment, and 
it is only a small part of what I intend to present. 

Mr. Stephens. I do not see how the failure to pay Miss Kirby 
supports either one of those theories. 

^Ir. McGi IKE. X<!t the ({uestion as to whether she was or was not 
paid. Mr. Rothermel raised the question by interrogation, after I 
had read the letter. I had no intention of going into the details as 
to whether she was or Avas not paid in full. I had the facts. 

The chairman is (|uite right in saying that Mr. Cole should make 
his own statement. These are letters which he wrote me, and I 
simply want to show the relations betAveen Mr. Cole and Mr. Elliott, 
and almost everybody else to Mr. Elliott, in order to find out who 
is telling the truth in this matter, because all the presons are not. 

Mr. Stephens. Have you something else you desire to put into the 
record ? 

Mr. McGuiRE. Yes, sir; I have. 



FUR SEAL INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA. 53 

As I say, I always found Mr. Elliott in the committee room. He 
would always answer the telephone, from the time Miss Kirby left, 
and generally while she was there. In the course of the hearings 
there were accusations made by Mr. p]lliott against a great many dif- 
ferent peoi^le, and as one of the members of the committee my idea 
was to ascertain whether Mr. Elliott was reliable. I proceeded to 
do that by an investigation as a member of the committee. These 
charges were just a rehash of Mr. Elliott's. He would refer to the 
record to prove what he said, and there was something else in the 
records in the past showing what Mr. Elliott had said. It then 
became a material question as to whether Mr. Elliott has ever been 
in the employ of the Alaskan Commercial Co. 

I undertook to make an investigation as to whether Mr. Elliott 
had been in the emjiloy of the Alaskan Commei'cial Co. That was 
the first company that e^•er took a lease on the islands. Their lease, 
I think, extended from 1870 to 1890. There was a controversy be- 
tween this Alaskan Commercial Co. and the Xorth American Com- 
mercial Co., or sealing company. My first information from Mr. 
Elliott — this might be backed by the" record — my first information 
from Mr. Elliott was that it was an awful imposition to say he had 
ever been in the employ of the Alaskan Commercial Co., that it w^as 
a slanderous and an outrageous thing, Mr. Madden will tell you the 
same thing. So it ran on until we finally looked back and found an 
old record in a hearing before the Ways and Means Committee, after 
Mr. Elliott had stated that he never had been in the employ of the 
Alaskan Commercial Co. : we found this record. He finally con- 
fessed that he had been in their employ and had received thousands 
of dollars from them. 

Mr. P]lltott. Where are the records? Bring out the records. 

Mr. Mc(tI'ire. I have the records right here noAV. 

Mr. Elliott. I have the record, too. 

Mr. INIcGuiRE. I brought these other matters up simply to de- 
termine the veracity of the parties concerned, and to show, in view 
of that most unfortunate condition that in regard to this material 
matter, he testified over and over again both ways, and the minority 
of the connnittee felt it could not do justice to either itself or to the 
Congress without recommending that he be prosecuted, and so the 
recommendation is contained in this minority report, that the De- 
partment of Justice look into it, and there can not be any doubt 
about the outcome if he is prosecuted. There can not be any possible 
doubt about that. 

I want to read to the members of the committee a few of the ob- 
servations of the minority. 

Mr. Elliott. There is an answer to that. 

jNFr. ^IcGuiRE, Of course, after the minority report was made Mr. 
Elliott had to write another rei^ort. He has continued to write re- 
ports, and charges them to the Government. 

I want to read to you what the minority report says on page 12: 

Prrbnps nothiiifr can l)ettpr demonstrate his iiietliods than to bring out his 
invariable habit of iniiJUtin.ii, inii)ro])er motives to and otherwise charging all 
public men who, in legislative or administrative matters relating to the seals, 
either disregarded the gratuitous and offensive advice of Elliott or who took 
action in such matters in a manner which did not meet with Elliott's approval. 
It is impossible for the undersigned in the short time available to review El- 



54 FUR SEAL INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA. 

llott's history durint; tlie luniiy yoiirs lio has l)cen i)nrsiiing his tactics, and to 
cite all (he vicious ami uiijnst criiicisiiis of i)iil>lic iiieii he had published in 
that time. The i)resent hearings, however, afford sufficient examples to sulD- 
ciently portray his methods. In them, for instance, he has accused varloua 
public men of irregnlarities in connection with the seal question. They are 

Mr. Stephens. They all appear in the record? 
Mr. McGiiKE. The record is full of them. 
Mr. Elliott. It is all borne oHt in the testimony. 
Mr. McGiTiKE. The record goes on to say: 

They are: Presidents Benjamin H.irrison and Grover Cleveland. (Hearing 
4, ]). io;{.) The following Secr**taries of departments: James G. Blaine and 
John W. Foster. (Ile.iring 3, second series, p. 785.) Charles Foster. (Hear- 
ing 10, p. 668.) L. J. Gage. (Appendix A, p. S.) 

You will find all these references on the pages which are noted, so 
that you may see just what he says of them in the record. 

The report goes on to name some other public men to whom he 

refers — 

Elihu Root. (Hearing 4, p. 201.) Richard (Uney. (Hearing 4, p. 201.) 
Cliarles Nagel. (Hearing 1. second series, pp. 221. 237.) Assistant Secretary 
C. S. Hamlin. (Hearing 12. pp. 763. 767.) The following Senators: John T. 
Morgan. (Cleveland Plain Dealer, Jan. 12, 1908.) 

I will show you a little later what Mr. Morgan had to .say about 
Mr. Elliott— 

C. W. Fairbanks. (Hearing 4. pp. 212. 213.) S. B. Elkins. (Hearing 10, 
p. .'568.) 

The following Congressmen: C. H. Grosvenor. (Cleveland Plain Dealer. 
Jan. 12, 1908.) Sereno E. Payne. (Hearing 10, p. 620.) 

and many others solely because of the fact that they differed with 
Elliott as to manner in which a public trust legally imposed upon 
them should be administered. 

He has stigmatized as " scientific prostitutes." " carping and incompetent 
critics," " hogwash experts," and various other like terms such I'eputable men as 
David Starr Jordan, president of Stanford I^niversity ; Dr. F. A. Lucas, curator 
in chief of the American Museum of Natural History; Dr. C. H. Townsend, in 
charge of the New York A<inarium ; Dr. Leonhard Ste.lnegar, curator in chief 
of the United States National Museum : Dr. Barton W. Everman, director of 
the museiun of the California Academy of Sciences ; and all other scientific men 
who have opposed his erratic contentions regarding conditions surrounding seal 
life, and Ids e<iually unfounded conclusions regarding the actions of the Gov- 
ernment ofllcers and of the legally constituted lessee of the sealing right in 
connection with the taking of sealskins. To quote the extravagant expressions 
of vitui)eration which Elliott has heaped upon these above-mentioned men, 
because of thiMr having had the temerity to api)ear at these hearings and testify 
in a maimer to refute Elliott's testimony, would be to give additional publi- 
cation to expressions that, to say the least, are not currently used ainong 
decent men. (Hearing 1. 2d ser.. p. 6; hearing 7, p. 301.) 

It is hardly necessary to state that Elliott has been repudiated by tlift 
scientists named above and by many others, all of whom have examined tlie 
seal rookeries and, as a result, have reached conclusions wholly divergent from 
those advanced by Elliott. In fact, Elliott stands alone, repudiated by all save 
and except the majority members of this committee. 

During the years in which Elliott's charges have been made to Congress they 
were referred in each instance to and were examined and repudiated by the 
Connnittee on Ways and Means so many times that the dates and sessions need 
not be specified. 

Mr. Elliot'J'. "i'ou can not specify one of those sessions. 

Mr. McGuiHE. The whole thing — these charges have been stand- 
ing for 20 years, and they have been before tlie Ways and Means 
Committee a number of times, regardless of party. 



FUR SEAL INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA. 55 

Mr. Elliott. I deiiy that. 

Mr. Stepiiexs. Do not interrupt the witness, please. 

Mr. Elliott. I beg your i3ardon. 

Mr. McGuiRE. The report goes on to say : 

In more recent .years the Ways and Means Committee, after an exhaustive 
series of liearings on liis charges, became so disgusted with liis baseless com- 
phiints and witli his vituperation of public men of high standing, then dead, 
that they refused to i>ublisli the iiearings and virtually hooted him out of the 
committee room. 

We are taking this from tlie testimony. 

Mr. Elliott. There is no testimony to that effect. 

Mr, McGuiRE (reading) : 

In that hearing, which was held in 1907, Mr. C. H. Grosvenor, of Ohio, in- 
formed Elliott that he (Elliott) was the most contemptible and insulting witness 
that he had ever heard l)efore any conunittee. In the hearing on the bill to 
give effect to the seal treaty now in force, held before the Committee on 
Foreign Affairs, January, 1912, Elliott appeared and testified at length, pur- 
suing his customary tactics of slandering all those who diffei-ed with him. 
The conunittee, however, reported to the House a bill which was directly op- 
posed to Elliott's recommendations, which bill the House passed by a vote of 
2 to 1. The Foreign Relations Committee recently, in a hearing to con- 
sider confirmation of the appointment of the present Commissioner of Fisheries, 
had Elliott before it as a witness, and, after listening to his testimony, in which 
he strongly opposed the confirmation, took action directly at variance with 
Elliott's protest. 

There are a number of incriminating documents that were secured 
for the purpose of that hearing, and I think I can produce those 
documents. The Secretary of Commerce and Labor secured them. 
He w^anted the confirmation and took them over to the committee. 

If you will remember that point and read Mr. Elliott's testimony 
near the close of these hearings, in connection with his examination 
over there, when he was confronted with the documents, it may be 
of some interest to the committee. 

The report goes on to say : 

The opinion of the undersigned regarding the unreliability of Elliott — the 
sole witness by whom these charges are sought to be substantiated — is not 
founded solely upon his testimony, his actions, and demeanor before the com- 
mittee, although they are of a nature sufficient to allow any unbiased person to 
form a correct estimate of Elliott's lack of trustworthiness. The following 
persons, men of unquestioned integrity and judgment, have had this to say 
of him : 

Gen. O. H. Howard : " During the year 1865, Mr. Elliott, then an employee of 
the telegraph company that attempted to establish a line from America to Europe, 
via Siberia, was stationed at Puget Sound, about 800 miles from the southern 
boundary of Alaska, and never approached it nearer than that until the year 
of 1872, when it had been five years American territory. 

" On the strength of this Mr. Elliott asserts that he has been in Alaska before 
the American advent. We will now show what experience he has had in the 
country since. 

" Mr. Elliott went first to Alaska in the spring of 1872 in a subordinate 
position, being assistant to Capt. Bryant, who was then the Government agent 
on St. Paul, the largest of the fur-seal islands, where he, Mr. Elliott, married 
a native girl. Mr. Elliott remained on the island about a year, returning in 
1873, without having seen anything of the rest of the immense territory except the 
little Aleut village on Unalaska Island, where he touched on his way up and down. 
After his arrival at Washington he published a work on the habits of the fur 
seals and made himself conspicuous by preferring charges against Capt. 
Bryant, who, by the way, had proved himself not very pliable in the hands of 
the Alaska Commercial Co., and consequeAtly was anything but popular with 
them. 



56 FUR SEAI, INVESTiCIATlON IN ALASKA. 

" Mr. Klliott's roi)ort is, just now, as the Alaska Coiiiinercial Co. desires, 
anil inijrlit itc mist n ken Ini- a statoiiicnt written i»,v a nieniher of tliat company. 

" Tlie aim and puriJuse of sucli arj^uments are too transparent to need any 
comment, and altlioutili we have no doubt tliat it does not pay for Mr. Elliott 
to liave any different views, yet we are surprised to find him so little shrewd as 
to come out with sucli undisfruised and clumsy pi-aise of the Alaska Commercial 
Co.. which lets at once the cat out of the bag." 

That was in a report which (ien. irowaid made to the War Depart- 
ment on A hi ska. in 187'). 

Mr. Elliott. He repncliated that himself; (Jen. Howard said that 
he had heen imposed uj>on. 

Ml-. McGuTiu;. Tliis is what Senator Morgan, of Ahibama, had to 
say and I am (|ii(>tinof now from the records of the proceedings of the 
tribunal of arbitration, at Paiis. volmne 1. page 108: 

I know Mr. Elliott, whom the British Government has dul)bed " professor." 
I have respect for his character .ind sprightliness. He is a painter in water 
colors of no mean pretensions, but his use of color does not stop with his can- 
vas. It enters into all he says, and makes him too vivid an enthusiast for a 
safe reliance on questions of measurements, statistics, and cold facts. 

That connnent arose over a question of measurements of sealskins, 
and that is taken from the record. Then I have also the statement 
made by Gouverneur Morris, a special Treasury agent in Alaska, 
in which Mr. Morris says, in a report to the Secretary of the Trea.s- 
ury. dated November 25, 1878 : 

The general reputation of Harper's Magazine heretofore borne for truth 
and veracity and the care with which its articles have been selected have given 
it a world-wide reputation; but any publication of the kind is likely to be taken 
in, and from the very high character enjoyed by the magazine it can not be 
denied that the article of Mr. Elliott has had a very damaging effect upon 
Alaska. It is written with a certain air of varisemblance, calcidated to deceive 
the unwary and grossly impose upon the credulity of the reader. It is not so 
charged in express words that such was the intention of the writer. I prefer 
to ascribe it to gross and pali)able ignorance rather than to intentional design. 

So little is known about Alaska that whenever an.vthing comes up in Ouigress 
relating to it information is sought wherever it can readily be found. The 
'■ informant " is ever on hand, with his work on fur seals comfortably tucked 
underneath his left arm, to inii»art all the knowledge extant about the country. 
" for he knows more about Alasaka than any man living." 

A decade has passed since we acquired this Territory, and for a decade it has 
afforded employment and subsistence for its present .sense keeper and it is 
about time this bubble was pricked and the bladder not quite .so much iniiated. 

I am fully aware of all the conseciuences to be dreaded, the responsibility 
assumed, when rash enough to dispute tlie hen^tofore self-established authority 
from the Arctic Ocean to the Portland Canal. 

This man seems to be the natural foe of Alaska, prosecuting and persecuting 
her with the brush, the pencil, and the pen of an expert whenever and wherever 
he can get an audience, and I attribute the present forlorn condition of the 
Territory to-day more to his ignorance and misrepresentation than to all other 
causes combined. 

(iou\erneur Morris, in another reference to Mr. Elliott in the 
report already referred to, sa^'s: 

As for Mr. P^lliott, I desire simply to say that he has not been in Alaska at 
all for a dozen years or more, and never spent a week of his whole life in the 
.southeastern s(>ction, where more than nine-tenths of the white population is 
to be found. He has no interests whatever in Alaska ; the " fox farm " of which 
he claims the ownership is a myth; his only interest in Alaska, according to his 
own stiitement before the House Conunittee on Territories last spring, is that 
of a paid lolibyist of the Alaska Commercial Co., in Washington, where he is 
invariably to be found at every succeeding session of Congress, ready to bol) up 
and give wholly disinterested (':) information to the honorable Senators and 



FUR SEAL INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA. 57 

M("nil)er.s, whenever iiiiy measure desifiiied to promote the settlement iuul develop- 
ment of Alaska or hetter the condith)n of her people is hroaehed in either 
House. 

The fact is. either IMr. Elliott entertains a mistaken idea of the duty he 
owes to his employers (the Alaska Connnercial Co.. hy whom 1 am unwilling 
to believe him jirompted in his persistent misrepresentations of Alaska and 
her people), or else he must be icoverned by a malicit>us hatred of the peoi)le 
of this Territory, among whom he is chiefly noted on account of the colossal 
impediment with which his veracity seems to be afflicted. 

And then I desire al.so to refer the committee to the statement of 
Hon. ¥j. J. Phelps, one of the counsel for the United States in the 
tribunal of arbitration of Paris, in which Mr. Phelps says: 

There was a violent comiu'tition at Washinjiion about the renewal of the 
lease, and the new company (the North Amei-ican Connnercial Co.) jrot it 
from the old, and Mr. Elliott's side was defeated, and then imnusliately .ifter — 
that is to say. within two or three months — he made bis appearance on the 
island*?. Then what took place? F:)r the first time lie makes the discovery 
that tiie virilit.v of the herd is beinir destroyed by tlie business of over- 
driving. 

The discovery of Mr. Elliott was an attack on the administration of the new 
company that had got it. You see \\hat it is : A violent rhetorical attack upon 
the business that the company was carrying on. If you read his field notes, 
they will be found to contain an ounce of observation to a pound of rhetoric. 
A scientific observer would make field notes out of doors and put them down as 
a basis for subsequent collation and analysis — as statistics; but his statistics 
are all rhetoric. 

You will notice Mr. Phelps says " for the first time he makes the 
discovery that the virility of the herd is beinj^ destroyed by the 
business of overdriving;." That is after his company had paid him, 
I think he said, something: like six or seven thousand dollars. He 
said that in his own testimony, and he previously said he had not re- 
ceived that. 

Mr. Elliott. I deny that. 

Mr. McGuiRE. Here are some contradictions. 

Mr. Stephens. Could Ave not save a little time by makino- that re- 
port a part of this hearing without reading it? 

Mr. McGuiRE. I would like to read some of the contradictions, but, 
of course, if vou do not care to hear them I will simj^ly insert them as 
a part of this record. 

Mr. Stephens. Of course, it is very interesting, and we want it 
before us, but I thought perhaps we might save a little time by simi^ly 
inserting that in the record. However, I am willing that you shall 
read that, if you desire to do so. 

Mr. McGuiRE. There are only a page or two of the contradictions. 
It will only take a few minutes. 

Mr. Stephens. All right; go ahead. 

Mr. Mc'GuiRE. Here is a quotation from Mr. Elliott. It is found 

on page 10 of the report : 

In 1872 I was selected as an agent of the Smithsonian Institution lo i)ro- 
ceed to the seal islands of Alaska and made an extended biological study of 
the life thei-eon. I was qualitied — notice this — I was qualified for the work by 
10 years' service at the Institution as a working naturalist and trained artist. 

That is found in hearing 1, page 5. 

Then here is another quotation from Mr. Elliott, found in hearing 
4 . page 20.5 : 

I was never in the employ of the Smithsonian Institution but for four months 
in mv life, and tlien when I was a boy. 



58 FUR SEAL INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA. 

Mr. Elliott. That is entirely correct. 

Mr. McGuiRE. Then, in hearing 2 of the second series, on page 6, 
we find this from Mr. Elliott : 

As an Mssociatf !in(l colluhorator of the Smithsonian Institntion, I was asked 
hv i'rof Mein-y and I'rof. Caird, secretary and assistant secretary, to go to 
the Pribih)f Islands in April, 1S72. there to study the hiolojrj^ of the fur seal. 

Here I quote again from the record of the testimony of Dr. Ever- 
niann, in hearing 10, on page 585 : 

I want to say he is not a collaborator nor an associate collaborator of the 
Smithsonian Institution, and the report of the Smithsonian Institution to-day 
show^? that he is not. 

Elliott has testified he was. 

That is his testimony, that he is not in the employ of the Institu- 
tion, whereas his testimony was that he was there. 

Then here is a letter addressed to Mr. Elliott by Prof. S. P. 
Langley, Secretary of the Smithsonian Institution, found in hear- 
ing 7, page 314 : 

I have hesitated to speak to you about representations which are made to 
me that the fact of your having in the past occupied a room in the Institution, 
and that you are still addressed here under the supposition that you are yet 
an occupant of the building, together with the association of its name with yours 
in a correspondence. Interviews, and Government documents, have given rise 
to misapprehensions. 

Such remonstrances have been made to me, both from official and private 
sources, upon the alleged use of the Institution's name in connection with 
your own in regard to such debatable matters as the fur-seal fisheries that I 
feel obliged to sjieak to you about the matter. 

Mr. Elliott. Read the rest of the letter. 

Mr. McGuiKE. Yes; I will be glad to read the rest of it. 

I know your early connection with the Institution and your continued re- 
gard for it' and I am persuaded that you would be yourself the last person to 
wish to cause it trouble. 

I have thought it best, therefore, in view of all this, to write you as I do, 
leaving future action to your good judgment. 

Mr. Elliott. If the subsequent letters were printed they would 
show that I did exactly what was right. 

Mr. McGuiRE. There is a great deal of other matter in the report. 
I read from the report, for this reason — that it is all copied from 
these hearings. There can be no question as to the truthfulness of 
the report, because it is not the testimony of any particular witness, 
but it is copied from the hearings. 

Mr. Elliott. What does Gen. Howard say? 

Mr. McGuiRE. These are the facts taken from this record and 
the record before the Ways and Means Committee. 

Now, then, Mr. Chairman, recently I have received a number of 
letters from different Congressmen disclosing to me a letter to them 
by Mr. Elliott, franked from the Committee on Expenditures in the 
Department of Commerce and Labor, with his name signed to the 
letter, sent in a franked envelope. 

Mr. Elliott. Bring them in here. 

Mr. McGuiRE. I will fin-nish them. I can furnish a dozen of 
them. 

Mr. Elliott. They are not franked. 

Mr. McGuiKE. Scott Ferris has one. They were franked, and I 
have some of them in my office. 

Mr. Elliott. Bring them in. 



FUR SEAL INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA. 59 

Mr. McGuiRE. This thing has been going on in this Avay, and I 
confess that I do not feel that it is treating the Congress of the 
United States right to have these things going on, in committee or 
elsewhere, by a person who has been repudiated by practically 
everybody. 

I will say this, Mr. Chairman, that when you read this report 
carefully — these minority views — I do not think the members of the 
committee can avoid reaching a conclusion that Mr. Elliott ought 
to be prosecuted for perjury. I have convicted, perhaps, 50 men 
for perjury, and I never had a better case than this one in my life, 
and I can say frankly that I thought as a matter of law and as a 
matter of right I ought to be able to do what little I could to pre- 
vent this party being allowed anything after he hag been investi- 
gator and charger and report writer. 

Gentlemen of the committee, suppose Mulhall had been given the 
keys to Mr. Underwood's room, or the keys to anybody else's room, 
and suppose he had been permitted to write a report, and suppose 
he had been sent to investigate his own charges, do you not suppose 
he would have found that somebody was wrong? 

Here is a man very much more discredited than is Mulhall. I 
really think it is one of the most unfortunate things which has 
occurred in my experience since I have been in the American Con- 
gress. I think what I am doing is a duty I owe to the American 
Congress. 

Now, then, as to Mr. Gallagher, I have absolutely nothing to say. 
He is a young man who is not presumed to know the law. He was 
called upon for this foreign service and lost his time. In a strict 
legal sense, I presume. Congress does not owe him money. But there 
is such a thing as a moral obligation, and it seems to me — I may not 
make any objection to Mr. Gallagher's account being paid; that is, 
some reasonable and proper amount. 

Mr. Stephens. I am glad you mentioned that, because I intended 
to ask you in regard to that. 

Mr. McGuiRE. Now, as to Mr. Cole, I do not know. If Mr. Cole 
has done work for which he has not been paid I should think he 
ought to be paid for it. I can not get anything out of the com- 
mittee, because I can not get anything there that has not been 
touched by the accuser and the report writer and the investigator. 
We did not have any clerk to whom I could go without getting 
matter that was contaminated and doctored. 

In that connection there is one place where Mr. Elliott showed 
unanimous action by the committee saying he should have pay. 
That is not true. I have always fought it, and Mr. Patten has 
always fought it, and I think when it comes on the floor of the 
House there will be some other gentlemen who will have something 
to say about it. 

Mr. EllIott. Somebody certainly will have something to say 
about it. 

Mr. Stephens. You mean members of the committee? 

Mr. McGuiRE. Yes ; I think so. If they do not I shall be very 
much surprised, in view of what they have said to me. I know some 
of the things that have been said. I am waiting to see what these 
gentlemen will do. I take it that the gentlemen are square and 
honorable. 



60 FUK SKAL INVESTJCiATlOX IX ALASKA. 

Gentlemen. I never could content myself to ac(|iiiesce in this mat- 
ter, which I ie*jard as the most unfortunate, in fact, the most out- 
rag:eous thin<r that I have ever had anything to do with since I have 
been a Member of the American Congress. There ought to be an 
investigation here by a joint committee. AVith all due regard to 
the gentlemen who are friends of mine, I think they have let some- 
thing slip by them. If there is a joint investigation, as we recom- 
mend here, a joint investigation by a Senate and House joint com- 
mittee, my opinion is that there will be some prosecutions. 

Mr. Elliott. There certainly will be. 

Mr. McCiuiRE. As to the former recommendation of the Depart- 
ment of Justice. I ha^ve looked into that, and there will not be any 
prosecutions. The law is well known, and there is no action being 
taken. But I wish we had some action from the Department of 
Justice, so that we might see what they think about it. 

As to Mr. Cole's claim, I know nothing about that. This did not 
come up in the course of the investigation. There was nothing said 
in regard to Mr. Cole's matter. Of course, if the committee thinks 
he ought to be paid I have nothing to say about that. I do not 
know anything about that. 

Mr. Stephens. This resolution does not cover Mr. Cole's matter 
at all. 

Mr. McGuiKE. Yes; I know it does not. 

Mr. Stepliexs, It refers to Mr. Elliott and to Mr. (jallagher. Of 
course it is contended that Mr. Cole's claim is included in Mr. 
Elliott's claim, but that is a controverted matter. On the face of 
the resolution it does not have anything to do with that. 

Mr. Rotiiermel. I would like to ask Mr. McGuire a (|uestion. 

Mr. Stephens. Certainly. 

Mr. IvOTHEmrEL. I have two papers which I want to show Mr. 
Mc(Juire, and I want him to look at these papers, and I want to ask 
him about them. 

j\[r. Stephens. All right. 

Mr. KoTHERMEL (exhibiting paper). I want to know whether this 
paper is dated back six weeks. That is a memorandum I had draw^n 
for yiiss Kirby. I submit this memorandum in the hope that when 
Mr. McCruire finds that he is mistaken that he will withdraw^ the 
Cole letter from the record. Look at these two papers, Mr. McGuire. 
I drew up that receipt the week before she was entitled to that 
money, and it was written out on the typewriter, and I laid the cash 
down for her and she Avalked out without signing that paper. I 
would like to have Mr. McGuire read those papers [handing papers 
to Mr. McGuire] . 

Mr. McCiUHJE (examining papers). Did you want me to read these 
into the record? 

Mr. Kotiier:mel. No. 

Mr. McGuire. The committee should know what these are. unless 
the members of the committee have looked at them. 

]\Ir. Stephens. You might read them into the record. 

Mr. JNIcGciRE (reading): 

Wa.shixgton. I). C. AiJiil 23. 191^. 
Fifty dollars. 

Received of .T. H. Rotliormel .$.')(). l)alanfe in full i>ji.vii)ent at the rate of $50 
a month, from Ausust. 1013. to April 21, 1914. 



FUE SEAL INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA, 61 

Mr. RoTTiERMEL. That is dated on the 23d of April. 

Mr. Mr(hiRj:. That is not signed. 

Mr. Rotiier:mel. That is what I toUl her to write on the type- 
writer and sign and handed her the money, and she would not do it 
and left the money. 

Mr. McGuiKE. The other one reads: 

Washixuton, D. C, JdiiiKirif ,jO, 1U15. 
Received of Jolin H. KotlienutM $50 balance in full for services rendered to 
the said .T. H. llotherniel from Auuiist 21. 1913, to April 21, 1914. 

In this connection I will state that the said .7. H. Rotherniel offered me the 
said amount in cash on April 23, 1914, in his office and asked me to sif?n a 
receipt for the balance in full, which I declined. 

M. Katharine Kirhy Hummel. 
Attest. 

J. T. Watkins. 

This is dated January 30, 1915. This is only a few days ago. 

JNIi". RoTHERMEL. She wrote me that she would like me to pay her 
now. 

Mr. McGuiRE. It has been running all this time without being 
paid? 

Mr. RoTHKRMEL. I did not know where she was. 

Mr. McGuiRE. Did 30U not make a statement on the floor of the 
House that all this had been paid? 

Mr. RoTHERMEL. No ; not the last month. That was not due. 

Mr. McCii IRE. She did not work for you any after that. 

Mr. RoTHERMEL. She came to my office. 

Mr. McGuiRE. But you made a statement on the floor of the House 
that \^ou had paid Miss Kirby in full. 

Mr. RoTHERMEL. I had paid up all that was due. 

Mr. McCtuire. She never worked for you afterwards, and why 
was not this due? 

Mr. RoTHERMEL. It was not due until the 1st of the month. I 
advanced this on the 23d, and now Cole has handed you a letter say- 
ing that I wanted her to date the receipt back six weeks, 

Mr. Mi.GuiRE. I am rather of the opinion that you are mistaken 
about the money not being due, because she had not worked for you 
for some time prior to the time Avhen you made a statement in 
February. 

Mr. RoTHEi.'MEL. Whenever the check came she was to be paid out 
of the check. That is what I have stated on the floor of the House. 

Mr. JNTcGnuE. Well, the record will show. If I am mistaken 
about tliat tlie lecord will show what is the fact. This paper reads: 

Washington. D. C, Johuoiij 30, 191.5. 

Received of John H. Rothermel $50 balance in full for services rendered to 
the said .T. H. Rothermel from August 21, 1913, to April 21. 1914. 

In this connection T will state that the said .7. H. Rothermel offered me the 
.said amount in cash on April 23, 1914, in his office and asked me to sign a 
receiiit for llic balance in full, which I declined. 

M. Katharine Kirby H^M^^EL. 

Attest. 

.7. T. Watkins. 

In that connection I have the letter which I mentioned awhile 
ago, which, with the consent of the committee, I would like to put 
into the record and which will throw some light on this. 

Mr. Rothermel. I am going to ask Mr. McGuire to withdraw that 
Cole letter which he submitted here in proof of the facts that he has 



62 FUK SEAL INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA. 

stated, and in regard to that matter both Miss Kirby as well as I 
myself can specify to that. 

Mr. McGuiKE. As to whether the Cole letter becomes a part of the 
record, that is for the committee to decide, but I will say this, that I 
will put the Cole letters and everything else I have in connection with 
this matter in the Congressional liecord, in case it gets to the floor 
of the House, and all those things can speak for themselves. 

Unless there are some questions which the members of the commit- 
tee would like to ask me, that is all I have to say, gentlemen. 

Mr. Elliott. Mr. Chairman, may I make a brief statement at this 
time ? 

Mr. Stephens. Yes; provided you do not take too much time. 

STATEMENT OF MR. HENRY W. ELLIOTT. 

Mr. Elliott. Mr. Chairman, I want to say a few words in, regard 
to some of the things which Mr. McGuire has said. I want to say 
that he has not stated this thing truthfully. He stated here that I 
had denied being in the employ of the Smithsonian Institution and 
then he subsequently brought in the " proofs " that I had been. I 
volunteered a statement that I had been in the employ of the Smith- 
sonian Institution at one of the first hearings ; I think it was in July, 
1911, but only for a few months; and that I had, as an associate 
and collaborator, occupied a room there and had done work there as 
an artist and a naturalist by contract. 

Mr. Scott. When was that? 

Mr. Elliott. That was from 1862 or 1863 until 1890. For 25 years 
I occupied the room in that Smithsonian Building as an " associate 
and collaborator"; and I will bring in for you and lay before you 
a monograph on the seal islands, in which Prof. Baird, the secretary 
of the Institution, nominates me as an associate collaborator, and 
states that he has sent me to the seal islands for that purpose. This 
is my " Monograph," submitted to the Tenth Census, United States of 
America, and printed in Volume VIII by the authority of Prof. Baird 
in I'egaixl to that. I coidd not have been in the employ of the Smith- 
sonian Institution and at the same time have been given a relation to 
it of that kind. I was an independent " associate and collaborator." 
For 25 years I occupied a room there in the north front between Prof. 
Theo. N. Gill, on the west side, and Dr. Elliott Coues, on the east 
side, and I did an immense amount of work there as an artist and 
naturalist for Government bureaus and different scientific societies; 
doing that work by contract, making anywhere from $2,500 
a j^ear, even in the beginning when I was a mere boy, and some years 
I made as much as $10,000 in five months. Do j'ou suppose I would 
be a mere clerk there, drawing a measly salary, if I had such an op- 
portunity to make more money and live better? Was that not 
natural? 

Then later I became an associate and collaborator, " to whom the 
institution returns its grateful acknowledgment" for collections 
large and valuable, and I have the letters I received in connection 
with that. And then because somebody tricked my good friend Wal- 
cott, and my good friend, the late Dr. Langley, into believing these 
lying statements such as those of Mr. McGuire, they wrote me those 
letters he quotes in my absence; then when I explained the matter 



FUR SEAL INVESTIGATION" IN ALASKA. 63 

to them, they said, substantially: "You come back here; we are 
sorry this has been done." 

Then there is another point here. He has "quoted from the 
records," he says. He says he has quoted from the report of Gen. 
Howard. Gen. Howard has made no such record about me. In 
Gen. Howard's report — in the "appendix" to Gen. Howard's re- 
port — among the miscellaneous letters and documents therein assem- 
bled, is a so-called " appeal," published by a so-called " civic asso- 
ciation " of San Francisco. No such association ever existed, and 
Gen. Howard was imposed upon. The man who wrote it was a de- 
frocked Greek priest, a scoundrel. That villian's words abusing me 
as a blackmailer have been put into Gen. Howard's mouth as an in- 
dictment of me. Gen. Howard repudiated the thing. A letter was 
written by him to Prof. Henry, saying that he was sorry that such a 
thing had gotten in there. That is a sample of these McGuire 
" records." He says I am " quoting testimony of my own," etc. xlll 
through the sworn record here I quoted nothing but that testimony 
of his own guilty people. I do not use my own words ; I do not use 
my own finding. I use their own, and then I confront them with 
their lying denials, or contradiction of it. Nowhere do I bring in my 
own statement; nowhere do I use my own individuality. I quote 
their lying statements to Congress to deceive committees, and then 
bring in the official record of their own making, which contradicts 
them; their ow^n official words, which convict them. That is what I 
have been doing. Of course, I have been very much abused. I 
expect that. 

He saj^s he " would prosecute me for perjury." He would not dare 
do it ! He can not bring in a single thing that anybody, if even a 
knave, would base an indictment for perjury on. He brings in a lot 
of scurrilous language and indecent statements. Look at the records 
and see what they brought in about me — these lying and false state- 
ments, such as he has just spewed out. 

Then he brings in a letter from Mr. Cole, putting words in my 
mouth. I heard Dr. Cole admit under oath, December 15 last, that 
he was a thief, when being examined before the Committee on Ac- 
counts. He puts the word of a thief against my word ! And that is 
considered " dignified " by this minority member of the Committee 
on Expenditures in the Department of Commerce ! 

I want him to bring it on the floor of the House. I have friends 
there who will gladly take up my end of the case on the floor of the 
House and present the facts. I am a good Republican ! I am not a 
"greasy" one; and, when I was beaten in a Democratic House, I 
went to my Republican friends in the Senate and then we beat you 
over there. We beat the combination of " greasy Democrats " and 
'greasy Republicans." But the good Democrats stood with me 
over there and in the House. We won the fight and you were 
whipped. 

He says that the Wa3^s and Means Committee made an investiga- 
tion. They never have made an investigation. They never have 
acted on the charges. They heard a few statements made by people 
who came before them January 14-28, 1907, and they never took 
those charges up in committee. 

The first time it was ever taken up w^as by order of the AVays and 
Means Committee May 11, 1911. I was taken to the Committee on 



64 FUR BEAl. INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA. 

Kxpcnditm-e.s in the DepfU'tnieiit of Coiiiiiierce and Labor and set 
to work tlu'it' by tlie Ways and Means Committee, and in this way 
this investigation was taken np first by order of the Ways and 
Means C<innnittee. and this business was set on foot. 

I have not been " discredited " by any conmiittee of either House. 
The record of the Ways and Means Committee, which I have here, 
is one that any man can be proud of. I have been through that com- 
njittee with three bills; and those three bills have been passed 
through the House, following my recommendation before the com- 
mittee. 

The only setback I ever got was in the Committee on Foreign 
Affairs, when Sulzer was chairman. There is no politics in this 
thing at all. We will have — 

Mr. Stephens. We will have to conclude in a few moments, Mr. 
KUiott. 

Mr. P2lliott. I am through. 

Mr. RoTiiERMEL. Mr. Chairman, I would like to make a short 
statement in regard to this matter. 

Mr. Stephens. We will take a recess now until half past 2 o'clock 
this afternoon. 

(Thereupon, at 1.15 o'clock, the connnittee took a recess until 2.30 
o'clock p. m.) 

AFTER RECESS. 

Mr. Stephens. Do you wish to make a statement now, Mr. Roth- 
ermel ? 

Mr. RoTHERMEL. If Mr. Cole is to make a statement I prefer to 
wait until he finishes. 

Mr. Stephens. Very well. We will hear from you now. Mr. Cole. 

TESTIMONY OF MR. CHARLES L. COLE. 

(The witness was duly sworn by Mr. Stephens.) 

Mr. Stephens. Mr. Cole, where do you live? 

Mr. Cole. In Allentown, Pa. 

Mr. Stephens. That is Mr. Rothermel's home town? 

Mr. Cole. Xo, sir: 36 miles away, but in the same district. 

Mr. Stephens. Were you e\er euiployed by Mr. Rothermel since 
he has been a Member of Congress and chairman of this Committee 
on Ex]ienditures in the I)ei)artuiont of Commerce? 

Mr. Cole. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Stephens. When did vou enter that employ? 

Mr. Cole. On or about the'23d day of April, 1914. 

Mr. Stephens. What was your contract with Mr. Rothermel with 
reference to your salary? 

Mr. CoLK. That T was to be paid $12 a week for personal work, 
and then I was to do the connnittee work, for which an alloAvance 
of $125 a month was paid by the Government. 

Mr. Stephens. AVere you to receive the $125 in addition to the 
$12 a week for personal services? 

IVIr. Cole. Yes. sir: I was. 

Mr. Stephens. Did you receive this .salary of $125 a month? 



FUR SEAL INVESTIGATION IX ALASKA. 65 

Mr. Cole. No, sir.' 

Mr. Stephens. What money did you actually received 

Mr. Cole. About six weeks after I entered his employ — Mr. 
Rothermel was home very busy during the campaign— which was 
in May or in the beginning of June, when he came back. I asked for 
some money and he gave me a $25 check on the National Capital 
Bank, and "l told him that was not all he owed me, and he said he 
was a little short but he would make it up. Then I asked him about 
the clerk's money, and he told me, "Joe is sick, and 1 don't like to 
take him off the roll." 

Mr. Stephens. To whom do you refer when you refer to "Joe"? 

Mr. Cole. J. M. Baker, who was carried on the roll as clerk of 
the committee — that he had to introduce a resolution to pay for 
the services of Mr. Elliott and Mr. Gallagher, and he would include 
me in there for as many months as I was with him until Joe came 
back, leaving me under the impression that Joe was sick and would 
come back. I did not say anything further about it. and the matter 
drifted on until we came to — in fact. I told Mr. Gallagher, the first 
one I told about it, and Mr. Gallagher said it didn't look very good 
to him; and later on I told Mr. Elliott, and, if I reinember the 
right w^ords, Mr. Elliott says, " The old fool. Does he want to get 
himself in a worse mess than he did in the Kirby affair? You can't 
be included in there." I said, '" I don't want to work for nothing." 
He said, " It will never go." Later on — I don't know whether Mr. 
Elliott spoke to Mr. Rothermel about the matter or not — but, at any 
rate, he said he would take care of me. 

Mr. Stephens. AVho said that? 

Mr. Cole. Mr. Elliott — that I was not to appear because, he said, 
'* That will knock the whole matter out." We had lots of talk about: 
it, almost every day, on the matter. 

Mr. Stephens. How long did you serve that committee as clerk? 

Mr. Cole. From that time on until about the middle of October. 

Mr. Stephens. About how many months? 

Mr. Cole. Seven months; maybe not quite seven months. 

Mr. Stephens. Did you receive any money except the $50 re- 
ferred to? 

Mr. Cole. I received all told from ]Mr. Rothermel $175. On June 
o, that is the $25 dollars I had reference to; June 16, $15; July 3, 
$35; August 1, $50; August 28, $10; and September 2, $40. 

Mr. Stephens. How much is due you now for your services? 

Mr. Cole. I claim the clerkship of the committee for which I 
was not paid. 

Mr. Stephens. AVhat would that amount be? 

Mr. Cole. That would be seven months at $125 or $875. I might 
add there, Mr. Stephens, that maj'be I was there about two months 
when Mr. Rothermel gave me a receipt signed b}^ Joe Baker on the 
disbursing clerk of the House to get his check for $125. I went 
• over and got that check. Then Mr. Rothermel says, "You indorse 
this check as acting clerk." I indorsed it " J. M. Baker," by my 
initials. Then Mr. Rothermel indorsed his name right under there, 
" John H. Rothermel, chairman," and I went over to the sergeant- 
at-arms and got the money for that and handed it to Mr. Rother- 
mel. That is all I know about it. What he did with it I do not 

44682—16 5 



66 i-'UH SKAI. JXVK.STKiATION IN ALASKA. 

know. If I rightly remember, once he paid me $-1:0 out of that 
money. Once or twice he paid me out of his regular secretary's 
check, and then several other times he paid me the mone}' he got 
out of his j)oeket — where from, I do not know, of course. Along 
in September Mr. Gallagher, who is from my own town — we had 
been talking of going home and spending a week at the fair, and I 
was short of funds, and I asked Mr. Rothermel for some money, 
and he said he would give me some before I had to go. He had 
been away from the office three or four days or a week, and when 
the time came to go the following week he was at the hotel sick, 
and I left on Saturday to go home after I had found out he had 
gotten 10 da.ys' leave of absence. You remember the docking rule 
was in effect at that time in the House, and I think I had a dollar 
and some cents in my pocket, and as I had been accustomed to 
going over there and getting that check every month, as I told you, 
I went over there and asked Mr. South whether I could get the 
September check, and he stated if it would not be cashed before the 
end of the month, I could. So he gave me that check for $125. 
I indorsed that check " J. M. Baker," per my initials, and then 
signed on it " Charles L. Cole, clerk," and I got that check cashed 
through a friend of mine at home, with the understanding that he 
would hold it until the end of the month, so as to not get in the 
Treasury before that. That money I got also. I got it because I 
didn't have a penny, and I had to have the money. In the mean- 
time I had come across this correspondence which showed Baker 
w^as carried as clerk of the committee from December, 1913, because 
of holding notes against Mr. Rothermel. 

Mr. Stephens. So in addition to the $175 which Mr. Rothermel 
l)aid you. you have received $125? 

Mr! Cole. That one check: yes. sir! That would make $300 all told 
that I had got. 

Mr. Stephens. Do you claim that $175 is for tlie personal work 
covered by that $12 per week you received? 

Mr. Cole. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Stephens. Then you hnve received $125 on your clerk's salary? 

Mr. Cole. Yes. sir. I should have received, according to contract. 
$350 for personal services for seven months plus the other, and I 
figure that, of course, he gave me $300 all told. 

Mr. Stephens. Who else worked in that committee room besides 
yourself ? 

Mr. Cole. Xobody but Mr. P^lliott and the chairman, Mr. Rother- 
mel. 

Mr. Stephens. There was no other employee there? 

Mr. Cole. No, sir. 

Mr. Stephens. Except yourself? 

Mr. Cole. No, sir: nobody did a bit of the Avork from the time I 
entered untill left. 

Mr. Stephens. Was Mr. Baker thei-e at any time? 

Mr. Cole. I saw him there one day in June or July. He had come 
on from Ohio. He was there one day and went out once or twice 
with Mr. Rothermel. 

Mr. Stephens. Where was Mr. Baker during all this time? 

Mr. Cole. In Ohio. 

Mr. Stephens. Is there anv further statement vou want to make ? 



FUR SEAL INVESTIGATION IX ALASKA. 67 

Mr. CV)LE. As I sai'd, I left Mr. Rothermel after he came back in 
October; I don't know what day it was; maybe the middle or maybe 
the early part : and he wanted me to go over and get this check then, 
and I told him what I had done — that I had got it already, because 
I had no money — and he got furious about it. He told me it didn't 
belong to me. and I said he knew it didn't belong to Mr. Baker, and 
I was doing the work, and he said. "That makes no difference,'' and 
then Ave had some other words and I went out of his office and left 
him. Then this matter was before Mr. Lloyd's committee. I had 
gone over with Mr. Rothermel and Mr. Elliott several times to get 
books and documents and papers, and Mr. Lloyd finally, one day, 
after I had been sent over seA^eral times to inquire the progress of it, 
I met Mr. Lloyd on the street car, and Mr. Lloyd asked about this 
matter, and he said. " We will not do anything until Ave get more of 
the Kirby matter; Ave Avant to knoAv more about this Kirby matter.'' 
Mr. Elliott came in, and Mr. Gallagher Avas present at the time, and 
instructed me to remain aAvay from the Committee on Accounts. He 
had found out they Avere questioning me and Avanted some informa- 
tion. Mr. Lloyd had asked me. and I told him I didn't knoAV whether 
I ought to make any statements: that I Avanted to get some advice 
before I did that. He said, " You get all the advice you want, but Ave 
Avill get at the bottom of this matter."' 

I spoke to several Members of Congress and told them the exact 
situation, and they advised me to tell the truth, and if I had any- 
thing to prove it by to shoAv it. I told Mr. Lloyd then what I kneAv. 
Then Mr. Lloyd inquired Avhether I saAV letters — actual letters — 
from Baker to Mr. Rothermel Avhich proved that Baker Avas being 
carried on the roll as clerk because he held notes against Mr. Rother- 
mel. I told him I did; that I run across them accidentally in the 
office; I found one in my desk, and the other two I found in the 
drawer of the table. He said, "You hold those letters, because I am 
going to call you and question you under oath, and I Avant the proof." 
I took them over and showed them to Mr. Lloyd, and he read them 
and advised me to keep them and not to part Avith them. I went 
home then, and my father received a letter from Mr. Rothermel 
in which he stated that he had discharged me for irregularities 
and a series of matters, and that I would be prosecuted under 
the State laws, and that he hated to tell my father this, but be- 
ing that he knew my father and my father's brother so well, 
he felt he ought to do it, This Avas fiA^e Aveeks after this tran- 
spired. Then he tried to make me trouble up home indirectly Avitli 
my family, because I couldn't gWe more than a nominal support as 
I should haA'e, because I didn't get my money to do it Avith. and that 
didn't work. Then he went to the Department of Justice and 
charged information against me that I was taking A'aluable papers — 
that I had taken valuable Government papers from his office. 

They sent a detective to see me, and I made a statement. The next 
day the chief asked whether I would come up and bring the papers. 
1 went up with the three letters I had, and they took photographic 
copies of those letters and advised me to keep them until this matter 
Avas all thrashed out by Congress and then turn them over to them. 
Since that they have tried on two different occasions to have me 
arrested under hoaxed charges, connected with the same matter. 



I 



68 FUR SEAL INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA. 

Mr. Kothoiinol has tried his best to jjreveiit me getting work wher- 
OA'er he could, simply because I told what I knew in this matter. I 
liave since turned the letters over to the Department of flustice, as 
per their instructions, photographic copies of which I ha\"e here and 
which I would like to submit to the connnittee, and which will proAe 
beyond a doubt wliy Baker was carried on the rolls. He never t^lid a 
stitch of work during Miss Kirby's time, so she told me. I know he 
has not in my time. I have the letters here, and if you care to have 
them read, I will read them. 

Mr. Stephens. We Avill not take time to read them now : just leave 
them with us. 

Mr. Cole. All right. This resolution. Mr. Stephens, Avhich was 
introduced on August 7. House resoluticm 587, called for a lump sum 
of $9,000. This was written up — I wrote this up myself — and Mr. 
Rothermel signed it. and I took it on the floor of the House. That 
was to be $:3,:')00 for Mr. (xallagher and $5,000 for Mr. Elliott, and 
n\y amount of $875 was in there. It was agreed, though, on that day 
that Mr. Elliott made the statement and said, '' There will be no 
clerk matter in this; I will take care of Charlie." Mr. Rothermel 
said, " I have also tAvo ladies, two stenographers, who must be paid 
out of this." and he hinted as much as if Mr. Elliott was going to 
take care of me this way and that Mr. Gallagher should take care of 
these ladies and pay them. In other words, so nobody else Avould 
be shown up in this deal to bring the truth out. Of course, the in- 
vestigation that is on Avas made by the Committee on Accounts, and 
whv they didn't act, I don't knoAv, but I am sure if you Avill speak 
Avith Mr. Lloyd in his committee, they Avill be able to enlighten you 
a lot on Avhat they found, not only in the testimony, but Avhat they 
got from several departments in reference to this matter. 

I am only asking for Avhat I Avorked for all through last summer. 
Mr. Elliott says I did personal Avork for him. I ask him to prove to 
this committee or bring in here any letter or any statement that I 
Avrote for him that had any bearing of a personal nature to him. I 
Avant to see that. 

Mr. McGuire read a letter here this morning in Avhich I stated to 
Mr. Elliott that I drcAv up letters to different departments in the 
matter and Mr. Rothermel merely signed them. I have here a letter 
of August 10, to Mr. Lloyd, chairman of the Committee on Accounts. 
Avhich ]\Ir. Elliott Avrote out in longhand and Avhich I copied on- the 
typeAvriter as it is here, and Avhich Mr. Rothermel merely signed and 
I delivered. Elliott Avrote out letters to the Attorney General and 
to the Department of Justice, trying to bring this suit to a head 
Avhen Congress did not act in the matter, and Sir. Rothermel merely 
signed his name to them. I Avant to iiresent this letter merely to 
shoAv that the statement I made to ]\Ir. McGuire is true. There are 
some changes in this letter Avhich have been made by Mr. Elliott's 
OAvn handAvriting that he can not dispute. 

Mr. Stephens. By Mr. Elliott? 

^Ir. Cole. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Elliott. That is not a committee letter. 

Mr. Cole. He erased and Avrote it in himself Avith pen and ink, to 
shoAv that he Avent over the letter there and saw it was all right, and 
Mr. Rothermel signed it as chairman of the committee. T would 
like to hand that in. 



FUR SEAL INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA. 69 

Mr. Stephens. Very well: you may file that. 

Mr. Elliott. That is not a committee letter. The committee letter 
follows that on October 7, 1914, and was draAvn by the committee in 
Mr. Stephens's room before I ever saw it. That letter of Mr. Rother- 
mel, August, was followed by the committee letter, which I have 
shown you. We may as well have that cleared up now. There is no 
use having that drifting along- That is not signed by anybody ex- 
cept Mr. Rothermel. and it is really a personal letter. Here [indi- 
cating] is the committee letter which was drawn up by Mr. Stephens 
in his office, and I never saw it. It was circulated and signed before 
I saw it. 

Mr. Stephens. When was this first resolution filed, providing for 
compensation ? 

Mr. Elliott. August 7, 

Mr. Cole. The date of the letter, Mr. Stephens, resolution Xo. 587, 
was filed August 7. 

Mr. Stephens. The letter which you present and which was signed 
by Mr. Rothermel is dated August 10, 1914. and begins by saying: 

Dear Mk. Chaikjian and Gkntlejiex : I am sending you herewith, for tlie 
kind consideration of yoxi and the connnittee. House resolution No. 587, calling 
for the sum of $9,500 to be paid out of the continsrent fund of the House foi- 
expert services rendered the committee, etc. 

Mr. Elliott. That was prepared by Mr. Rothermel or Mr. Cole. 
I neA'er saw that. Parts of that are mine, and I 'prepared it because 
they explain my direct work. Mr. Rothermel asked me to do that ; 
but the introduction is Mr. Rothermers or Cole's own work. I 
remember that. 

Mr. Stephens, The letter Mr. Elliott presents is signed by four 
members of the committee and refers to the same matter. 

Mr. Elliott. That is the committee letter. 

Mr, Stephens. But it is dated October 7. 

Mr, Elliott. That is the committee action. 

Mr, Stephens. This letter is not signed by Mr. Watkins. 

Mr, Watkins. At that date I happened not to be in the city, Mr, 
Chairman. I do not suppose my name is signed there. 

Mr. Stephens, No ; it is noted : 

Mr. John T. Watkins was absent from the city, but since then has said that 
above is in exact accord with his views. 

Mr. Watkins. I do not know what it is now. but if it could be 
read I could tell. 

Mr. Stephens. You may see the letter, Mr. Watkins, if you wish, 

Have you anything further to state, Mr. Cole ? 

Mr, Cole. I want to state that shortly after I started to work there 
I wrote a letter to every member of the committee, stating that I had 
been appointed the clerk, that if they wanted any information or any 
paper, or an3i:hing in reference to any matter. I would be glad to 
be at their service if they would command me. I wrote every meni- 
ber of the committee. 1 also acted at one meeting we had there in 
my capacity as clerk. That is when Mr. McGuire stopped me in the 
Hall of the House and gave me the minority report and told me to 
hand it in as clerk of the committee, which I did. The chairman 
then sent it back, claiming they had no authority, but several nights 
later we had a meeting in which Mr. Watkins, Mr. Abercrombie. Mr. 



70 FUR SEAL INVESTKiATIOX IN ALASKA. 

Rotheimel, and Mr. Elliott were present, and we went over the 
minority bill. I read the report, and stopped when I was told to 
stop, and they discussed it, and I think every member of the com- 
mittee knows I was there and knows I did the work; and I was not 
paid for it or I would not ask for it. There is no doubt there is 
proof right there that this man that has been receiving the money — 
for awhile toward the last, of course, he had not been receiving it — 
had no more right to it than anybody had. I am only asking for 
what is fair and just. If this matter had not got into the Committee 
on Accounts through the Kirby matter, I do not suppose it would 
have come up, but I was advised to state what I knew, and that is 
what I did, and for that reason they ha-ve been persecuting me ever 
since in every imaginable way. 

Mr. Stephens. Do you want to ask any questions. Mr. Rothermel? 

Mr. EoTHERMEL. Ycs, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. Stephens. Proceed, then. 

Mr. Rothermel. You came to tlie committee room and sat there 
nearly every morning, when yoii were not wanted around there. Is 
not that true? 

Mr. Cole. I came there before 1 started to work: I came there to 
look at the home papers. You never told me I was not wanted. 

Mr. RoTHEioiEL. Didn't I tell you to go home to your family; that 
your wife had given birth to a baby in the hospital? 

Mr. Cole. No. sir : you did not tell me anything of the kind. 

Mr. Rothermel. Didn't I tell you if you did not go I would oppose 
you getting any position in Washington if you did not go? 

Mr. Cole. You told me. prior to Christmas time — a fcAV days be- 
fore Christmas — that nothing could be done until after the holidays 
and that I should go home. I went home, too. 

Mr. RoTHERjiEL. You said you would go on Monday. 

Mr. Cole. And I went on Monday. 

Mr. Rothermel. I did that because your wife had two children 
and you paid no attention to them, and I told you so. 

Mr. Coi>E. You did not tell me anything of the kind. 

Mr. Rothermel. Didn't I ask you to go home? 

Mr. Cole. Because you could not do anything for me until after 
the holidays. 

Mr. Rothermel. You came in there and were about there every 
day. when I had no use for yoiL 

Mr. Cole. You never said that. Yon told me to come in any time, 
and I came around occasionally to look at the home papers; yes, sir. 

Mr. Rothermel. Does not Mr. Elliott know that you sat there at 
the end of the table every morning when I came in? 

Mr. Cole. I do not dispute that. T was not there every morning, 
but I came in frequently to look at the home papers. 

Mr. RoTHER>rEi,. Did you look ;it my papers when you had nothing 
to do with them ? 

Ml'. Cole. At youi- newspapers from home: yes. sir — and read 
them. 

Mr. RoTHER:\rEL. Did you look at any other papers? 

Mr. Cole. Xo. sir; I did not look at anything. 

Ml'. RoTHERiMEL. Scoutiug arouucl there all the time? 

Mr. Cole. No. sir. 

^Nfr. SroTT. What time was this? 



FUE SEAL INVESTIGATION IX ALASKA. 71 

Mr. Cole. This was in December. 

Mr. Stephens. This was before you employed him. Mr. Roth- 
ermel ? 

Mr. Cole. Yes, it was. 

Mr. RoTHEEMEL. Finally. I told you that Miss Kirby had made 
complaint about 3'ou being on the telephone and telephoning to 
women all the time when I was not there. 

Mr. Cole. And when you made that complaint, I called Miss 
Kirby in and she denied it. 

Mr. Rothermel. Miss Kirby stated it and told you that. 

Mr. Cole. But she denied it. 
. Mr. Rothermel. Are you sure? You are under oath. 

Mr. Cole. I am sure she denied it. You called her out and she re- 
fused to say anything. 

Mr. Rothermel. Ah ! She refused to say anything ( 

Mr. Cole. She denied it. She said. '* I don't know that he spoke 
to any girls on the telephone." 

Mr. Rothermel. Is it true that your wife li\es in Allentown and 
has two children over there ? 

Mr. Cole. Mr. Chairman. I don't see that that has any bearing. 
Why should he bring my famil}^ affairs into this matter? He has 
been doing it right along. 

Mr. Rothermel. One moment. I have some correspondence here 
that will throw some light upon that. 

Mr. Stephens. Just a moment, Mr. Rothermel. We have taken 
a rather wide range in this matter to-day and touched on a good 
many matters that are really not relevant. I do not see how this 
is pertinent at all, this reference to his family and how many children 
he has and whether he deserted them or not. 

Mr. Rothermel. He said he needed the money for his family, and 
he brought the family in. 

Mr. Stephens. I understand, but I do not see that that would 
throw any light on this transaction at all. So far as I am concerned. 
I do not think it is permissible or proper to go into it. Do you agree 
with that or not, Mr. Scott? 

Mr. Scott. I think that is correct, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. Stephens. Then Ave will leave the family affair out of this. 

Mr. Rothermel. I have to bring it in in connection with that check 
he took and concealed, and he said he needed that for his family, and 
here is his wife's letter that she hadn't received a cent from him. 

Mr. Stephens. That Avould not be competent evidence in any view 
of the case. 

Mr. Rothermel. He told me, and I am going to ask him. that when 
he had kept the October check, he went to the office and got it in the 
beginning of September and concealed it from everybody until it was 
cashed in October. Then I said, '' What right have you to do this? " 
He said he needed money for his family. 

Mr. Cole. I did not conceal it from anybody. I went over to Mr. 
South and I asked him about it. and I told Mr. Gallagher the same 
dav I got the check, and he will back me U]:> in that. 

Mr. Rothermel. Did you tell me i 

Mr. Cole. You were not here to he told. 

Mr. Rothermel. I was heie. 



72 FUR SEAT, TNVKS'JKiATION IN ALASKA. 

]Mr. Coi.K. You were not. If I wanted to 1 could tell the commit- 
tee why you were not here, but I (lo not like to go into personal 
affairs "of vours. like you did into mine. 

Mr. RoTiiERMEL. I was away in September, and you did not tell 
me, and when I told you to go and get the check on the '2d of October, 
you concealed it, and then next day you came in and told me. 

Mv. CoLK. I told vou when vou came back to Washington. 

Mr. RoTHEiJMKL. i asked you on the 2d or 3d of October whether 
vou had drawn the check as you always did. and you did not tell me, 
and I asked you to go and do it, and you did not even tell uie then, 
but next dav vou came and told me. 

Mr. Cole', t do not know whether it was that day or the next day 
that I told you, but I told you what I had done. 

Mr. Eother:mel. You told me then you needed it for your family. 

Mr. Cole. I said I needed it because you had not paid me any 
money, and 1 could not live on nothing. 

Mr*. EoTiiEioiEL. Here is your wife's letter, in wdiich she says you 
had not paid her a cent. 

Mr. Cole. But I had paid her some money. I could not pay what 
I ought to have paid her. but I would have paid her if you had acted 
honest in your transactions and given me the money I worked for. 
and my family would not have suffered then. 

Mr. RoTiiERMEL. You came to the office and asked me for work. 

Mr. Cole. You sent for me. 

Mr. RoTHERMEL. After Miss Kirby went out. 

Mr. Cole. You sent for me to fetch you the $50 to pay Miss Kirby, 
and she refused to sign that paper. 

Mr. RoTriER:\rEL. I am not talking about that. I had a distinct 
contract with you that you were to work for me for $50 a month. 

Mr. Cole. Twelve dollars a week for personal services, and I was 
to do the committee work, which I was to be paid for at the higher 
rate. 

Mr. Rothermel. Don't you know I never mentioned that? 

Mr. Cole. I know you did mention it. Do you think if I have a 
wife and two children I could support them there and me here on 
$12 a week? You brought my- family in and I will bring it in 
now, too. 

Mr. Stephens. No ; leave out the family. 

Mr. Cole. But he brought it in. Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. Rotiier:mel. You had a distinct understanding with me for 
$50 a month, or $12.50 a week. 

Mr. Cole. Twelve dollars a week for the personal work. 

Mr. Rothermel. And I arranged with you told 3^ou Avhen Baker 
would come back you Avould not be there at all. and that I would 
divide the checks between you and Baker. 

Mr. Cole. Why should Baker have anything? 

Mr. Rothermel. Answer the question. 

Mr. Cole. You did not tell me you have been paying Mr. Baker 
because he was sick then. 

Mr. Rothermel. Then you got the $50 a month. 

Mr. Cole. Xo: I did not get my $50 a month. 

Mr. Rothkrmel. Did not you go and draw the checks and take your 
money out of it? 



FUR SEAL INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA. 73 

Mr. Cole. Xo; I brought the money back to you. 

Mr. RoTHERMEL. Did not you draw your $50 every time you had 
the money in your possession? 

Mr. Cole. Xo, sir ; because I gave you the full $125, and you ]jaid 
me yourself, twice at least, by check. ' Once you paid me out of your 
secretary check and once you gave me a check on the National Ca))i- 
tal Bank, and twice you gave me cash out of your own pocket. 

Mr, Rothermel. When you had the money in your possession 
and had $50 coming to you, why didn't you keep it? 

Mr. Cole. When I did keep it one month you were going to ])ut 
me in jail for keeping my own money. That is what vou tried to do. 

Mr. Rothermel. We never talked about that. 

Mr. Cole. When I kept that one month's check you did not ? You 
tried to hold it up at the treasurer's office and tried to have me 
arrested. 

Mr. Rothermel. And when you took the $125 you should have 
gone to jail, too. 

Mr. Cole. Because I took what belonged to me ? 

Mr. Rothermel. The Pennsylvania laws will take care of that. 

Mr. Cole. All right; we vvili see about the Pennsylvania laws. 

Mr. Rothermel. Did you sign my name to a document to buy 
clothing in Washington? 

Mr. Cole. No, sir. 

Mr. Rothermel. Did you use mv stamp ? 

Mr. Cole. No, sir. 

Mr. Rothermel. Did you leave a paper there that you stamped my 
name to as chairman of the committee, to purchase goods at Saks 
&Co.? 

Mr. Cole. No, sir. I got an order from you for $10 or $12 to buv 
goods from Saks & Co.. which I wrote out on the typewriter and to 
which you signed your name, and if you will get your original letter 
from the firm it will show plainly it is your own signature which vou 
gave me. 

Mr. Rothermel. Did you sign my name with the stamp? 

Mr. Cole. No, sir. 

Mr. Rothermel. And state, " To whom it may concern." that I 
recommended that they should deal with you? 

Mr. Cole. No, sir. 

Mr. Rothermel. I have the letter. 

Mr. Cole. Then produce the letter. 

Mr. Rothermel. That is what I will. That is another thing that 
happened in my office. 

(Mr. Rothermel handed a paper to Mr. Stephens.) 

Mr. Rothermel. Did you send these scurrilous letters through the 
mail under Congressman Lewis's frank? Is that [indicating] Mr, 
Lewis's frank? 

Mr, Cole, Did I send girls letters? 

Mr. Rothermel, Scurrilous, libelous, blackmailing letters? 

Mr, Cole. If I signed them I can identify them. 

Mr. Rothermel. Is that right [showing a paper to the witness] ? 
Don't take it; you can see it without taking it in your hands. I don't 
trust you. 



74 FUR SEAT. INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA. 

Mr. Cole. Then I don't want to see it. If I can look at it right, I 
will answer it. but not when yon hold it np. You can not bulldoze 
me like that. 

^fr. RoTHERMEL (slioAving the witness another paper). Is this your 
signature? 

Ml-. Cole. Yes, sir : I think it is. 

]\Ir. Rothermel. And here is Lewis's name. Did you have au- 
thorit}^ from Lewis to use his franks to send 3'our own documents? 

Mr. Cole. That has nothing to do with this matter. 

Mr. Rothermel. Did you have authority from Lewis? 

Mr. Cole. I refuse to answer, because it has nothing to do with this 
matter. 

Mr. Rothermel. Mr. Chairman, he wall have to answer that. 

Mr. Stephens. State your question again. 

Mr. Rothermel. Did j^ou have authority from Fred E. Lewis, 
Congressman, to use his frank for your personal matters ? 

Mr. Cole. I never used his frank for personal matters. 

Mr. Rothermel. Did you have authority from him ? 

Mr. Cole. I used his stationery right along, and I used his en- 
velopes right along, and he knew I did. I had been around in his 
office right along. I had been sending his mail — coming down and 
sending some mail to him. 

Mr. Rothermel. I have a letter from him that you had no authority 
to do it. 

Mr. Cole. I used his letterheads right along, and he never objected. 

jVIr. Rothermel. Will you say you had authority to use his franks? 

Mr. Cole. I do not know whether he ever told me to use his en- 
velopes or not, but he knew I did. I was doing work for him and 
when I wrote him letters I used his envelopes. 

Mr. Rothermel. If he says you had no authority, will you still 
swear? 

Mr. Cole. He never told me I had no authority. I know if he let 
me be in his office and gave me a key to his office to send him his mail, 
he Avould not object to me using his letterheads to write letters on. 

Mr. Rothermel. Let me read this to you : 

[Fred E. Lewis. rennsylvani.i.] 

House of Repkeskxtatives, 
Washington, D. C, FchriKiiij S, 1915. 
Hon. .TonN TI. RoxHEKMEr.. 

House of Representatives. Washington, D. C. 
My Deau f'oi>i.EAGiTE : Your letter informing me that Charles I^. Cole has been 
sending miiil matter out under my frunk has come to me as a surprise, as he is 
not in my emi)loy nor has he any right to use any of my stationery. 

Some months ago, at the time you and Cole had a misunderstanding, he asked 
me for the i)rivi]ege of having his mail directed in the care of my office. As 
a constitueiu of mine. I felt that it was his privilege to ask this favor and 
granted it. Mr. Cole is not in my office, as you state, merely going there at 
the time mail is delivered to obtain his mail and place mine in a large envelope 
preparatory to forwarding to me when I am at home. Mr. Cole offered to per- 
form .this service for the privilege of receiving his mail at my office. He is not 
an occupant of my office and has no key, to my knowledge, nor have I ever 
authorized any person to give him a key. 

I am glad you called my attention to this matter, as I do not in any way 
want to get mixed up in the matter or matters in which you and Cole are con- 
tending, as you are both friends of mine and it is the order of the day, in minor 
and greater wars, to remain neutral. 
Very truly, yours. 

Frp:d H Lewis. 



FUR SKAl. IXVKSTKiATlOX IX ALASKA. 75 

Mr. Stephens. What is the (hite of that letter? 

Mr. EoTHERMEL. February 2o. I wrote to him. 

Do you say you had authority to use his franks? 

Mr. Cole. I have been in there right along. 

Mr. EoTHERMEL. Do 3"ou say you had authority from him to use 
his franks? 

Mr. Cole. He never told me that I did not have. 

Mr. RoTHERMEL. Did he tell you to use them? 

Mr. Cole. He saw me writing there right along. I made my 
reports in there on this matter right along. 

Mr. RoTHERMEL. That is a direct question which can be answered 
yes or no, 

Mr. Stephens. Answer the question, Mr. Cole. 

Mr. Cole. He never said I could and he never said I could not, 
but Mr. Lewis has been there time and time again when he saw me 
using his stationery- and his envelopes, and never said a word. When 
the detective from the Department of Justice came down I wrote my 
statement up over there, and JNIr. Lewis was present, and he did not 
say I could not use his paj^er. and I had been using it right along. 

iVIr. Scott. I notice you refer to stationerj' and letterheads, and 
Mr. Rothermel refers to franks. What are we to understand about 
that? Of course, a frank is a different thing from stationery. 

Mr. Cole. When I made that statement to the newspapers after 
he had been making statements right along charging me with every- 
thing under the sun, I made statements to several papers and I 
put them in envelopes and took them over to the press gallery of 
the House. I had put them in Mr. Lewis's franked envelopes, but I 
took them o^"er to the press gallery of the House myself, and if any 
of them got through the mail I don't know how it happened. 

Mr. Scott. Did you mail any of them? 

Mr. Cole. Xo. sir. If they got through the mail they got through 
accidentally. When I mailed letters through the mail I always put a 
stamp on. I may have overfooked it once or tAvice, as I suppose an^^- 
body would. The newspaper reporters had been after me and said: 
"Mr. Rothermel is charging you with everything: why don't you 
make a statement? "' I made them out and took them over to the 
press gallery. 

Mr. Scott. Did you mail them? 

Mr. Cole. No, sir. 

Mr. Scott. To whom did you give them? 

Mr. Cole. Over in the press gallery. 

Mr. Scott. To newspaper reporters? 

Mr. Cole, Yes, sir. 

Mr. Scott. Delivered by your own hand I 

Mr, Cole. Yes, sir. I took them over myself, because one man by 
the name of Amos Brown — I think he represents the Philadelphia 
Record — and several other men wanted statements. There was so 
much of it going on at the time that I really don't remember. If 
one or two of them did slip out in the mail I don't know it. Very 
likely that might have happened, but if it did I don't know it. I 
can not state that I did or did not. Mr. Lewis has written me also 
about the matter, and I wrote and explained it to him. 

Mr. Rotiierzsiel. To whom did I talk about you? I^^t ns hear 
that. 



7(3 FUH SKAI. INVKSTUiATlON IN ALASKA. 

Mr. Stkpiikns. Let us not ^o into that, gentlemen. 

Mr. KoTiiERMEL. He said 1 had been talking about him. 

Mr. Stephens. We can not take up every little side remark and 
follow it out to a conclusion. 

Mr. RoTiiEuaiEL. Did vou see Miss Kirby about this— about her 
$50? 

Mr. Cole. Yes; and I asked her, "Do you remember the time I 
fetched the money for Mr. Rothermel and you refused to sign the 
paper?" 

Mr. KoTiiEKMEL. I asked whether you saw her lately? 

Mr. Cole. I saw her about three weeks ago, perhaps. 

Mr. Rothermel. Did you ask whether she would not be willing to 
come to Reading and testify against me in a libel suit ? 

Mr. Cole. Yes. sir; because they had written to me to try to find 
her address and ask whether she ^Yould come up. and I did that. I 
do not deny that. 

Mr. Rt)THEKMEL. Wlio askcd you to go and see her ^ 

Mr. Cole. That is a personal matter of mine. 

Mr. Rothermel. I want to know. 

Mr. Cole. I will not tell you. 

Mr. Rothermel. Mr. Chairman, I think that is right. 

Mr. Cole. This is a libelous matter that has nothing to do with 
this $9,500 resolution. 

Mr. Stephens. Let us ct>nfine oursehes a little more closely to the 
matter before the committee. 

Mr. Ro'iHERMEL. These are personal attacks on me. and I think I 
ought to have some latitude. Mr. Cole was there, and he has acted 
badly before the Committee on Accounts. He said he would not 
answei' because it would incriminate him, and he has been sending 
these scurrilous communications out to the newspapers without a 
frank, and it has all been because my character is being assailed. 
That is the sum and substance of it. 

Mr. Watkins. Do you mean to say without a frank? 

Mr. Rothermel. Yes; Avithout a frank? 

^Ir. AVatkins. Or with a franks 

Mr. Rothermel. Without a frank. Here it is | indicating]. 

Mr. Watkins. ^'ou mean without a stamp. 

Mr. Rotherjmel. Oh, ves; without a stamp. 

Did you tell Mr. McGuire in that letter tliat I asked ^Miss Kirby 
to date a receipt back? 

Mr. Cole. I told Mr. McGuire in that letter what Miss Kirby told 
me. She said the receipt was dated back six weeks, and that is the 
reason she refused to sign it. I did not see the receipt, and 1 have 
never seen it. 

Mr. Rothermel. Why did you write that to Mr. McGuire^ 

Mr. Cole. Because I had reasons for doing that. 

Mr. RoTHEP.MEL. What reasons did you have? 

Mr. Cole. Reasons to show that if Miss Kirby said it, that the 
reason you wanted it dated back six weeks was to knock out this 
trouble you had in the House on the Kirby matter. 

Mr. Rothermel. Here is the receipt of" Miss Kirby [handing the 
witness a paper]. 

Mr. Cole. Yes: dated Januarv 30. 1915. That is just a few davs 
ago. 



FUR SEAL INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA, 77 

Ml'. KoTHEKMEL. Keuil it iiiid tlieii you can see what the truth i?^. 

Mr. Cole. I am not talking about this. 1 am talking about the 
incident that happened last ApriL 

Mr. RoiHERMEL. Did not you come to me the very day when I re- 
turned to Washington, after that was up in the House, and tell me 
that Miss Kirby said you should go down and tell the Members there 
was no truth in what they were saying about me withholding the 
compensation 'I 

Mr. Cole. How is that^ 

(The stenographer read the j^ending question.) 

Mr. Cole. No. I think I know what you mean. T was in the 
gallery with Miss Kirby when the matter came on, on a Saturday, 
and I went down after the dispute arose that nobody knew who the 
clerk of the committee was. I went down to call Mr. Madden out. 
and told him Miss Kirby told me the name of the clerk of the com- 
mittee Avas Joseph M. Baker. 

Mr. Rothermel. Did not you tell Mr. Madden that Miss Kirby 
told you it was a mistake? 

Mr. Cole. I did not tell him any such thing. 

Mr. Rothermel. Didn't you tell me so? 

Mr. Cole. I told Mr. Madden who the clerk was. 

Mr. Rothermel. She told you that there was no truth in that $50 
business that the Members talked about and that you should go 
down and tell them? 

Mr. Cole. That I should go down ? I had nothing to do Avith the 
matter. 

Mr. Rothermel. Were you sitting Avith her in the gallery? 

Mr. Cole. I Avas; yes: but Avhat right did I have to go doAvn on 
the floor? She asked me to tell them the name of the clerk of the 
committee was Joe Baker and that is Avhat I told Mr. Madden Avhen 
I called him out. 

Mr. Chairman, since Mr, Rothermel has dAvelt so much on this 
franking business here it just reminds me of something I would 
like to say in that connection that Mr. Rothermel had all kinds of 
trouble about during my time in his office and had letters from the 
Third Asssistant Postmaster General, Mr. Dockery, in reference to 
Mr. Elliott using his franks. He Avent down one time to the 
office and tried to explain it, Mr. Rothermel saying he had no right 
to use his frank, and he had told him so, and Mr. Elliott and Mr. 
Rothermel had a lot of fights about the matter. I suppose he Avill 
deny that, but the letter is on file and Gen. Dockery can ascertain the 
fact, I think Congressman Cramton Avas one of the men complain- 
ing that he was tired of having this man Elliott sending matters 
through the mail in which he Avas slandering Mr. McGuire and 
others. 

Mr. Rothermel. Don't you knoAv the Third Assistant Postmaster 
General showed us the envelope, and it Avas not even postmarked? 

Mr. Elliott. And you came up here and cackled all over the room 
about it. You cackled all over the room about it ; I didn't care any- 
thing about it. 

Mr. Cole, That has nothing to do with the case, but he brought 
it up, 

Mr. Stephens. Let us get doAvn to something that is relevant. 



78 I I'K SKAl. IXVKSIIC.VriOX IN ALASKA. 

Mr. (\)jj:. Mr. Cliairiiiiin, he had tho i)rivilego of asking me (lues- 
tions, and 1 would like to ask him one question. 

Mr. Stepjikns. He will make a statement after you get through. 

Mr. CoLK. I would like to ask why rfoe Baker was carried on the 
roll as clerk of that committee. 

TESTIMONY OF HON. JOHN T. WATKINS, A REPRESENTATIVE IN 
CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF LOUISIANA. 

Mr. Stephens. Judge Watkins, do you want to make a state- 
ment ? 

Mr. Watkins. I would like to ask INIr. McCxuiie a (|uestion or 
two, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. Stephens. Very w^ell. 

Mr. Watkins. I have been informed. Mr. McGuire. that you read 
a letter in the record from Mr. Cole in Avhich Mi-. Cole made the 
statement that Miss Kirby had told him that the reason she did not 
sign the receipt for the $50 for Mr. Rothermel w^as because the 
receipt was dated back. If that is the fact that that letter is in the 
record, I think, in justice to Miss Kirby, it w^ould be proper for me 
to ask the question if she did not both telephone yon and write to 
you stating that that was not true? 

Mr. McGuiRE. In part. 

Mr. Watkins. Did not she call you over the telephone and tell 
you that the receipt was not dated back? 

Mr. McGuiRE. Yes. 

Mr. Watkins. Then did she Avrite you a letter and state that the 
receipt was not dated back? 

Mr. McGuiKE. Yes; that it was not dated back. That is the letter 
I had reference to a while ago that I wanted to get and sho^v in 
connection with the Cole letter. 1 now have it in my pocket. Miss 
Kirby called me over the the phone and said to me that Mr. Cole 
had misunderstood her if he stated that she had said to him that 
the reason she did not sign the receipt that Judge Rothermel wanted 
her to sign for the amount due her w^as antedated six weeks. I told 
her that I had remembered her making this statement to me shortly 
thereafter that she did not sign the receipt and he would not give 
her her money, and the reason she did not sign the receipt was that 
the receipt did not state the truth. I remember that very distinctly. 
She said, " I will come up and see you." She came to my office and 
wanted to make a statement, and I said, "Miss Kirby, the better 
thing for you to do would be to w^rite me a letter. If you w^ant your 
letter used, I w^ill use it in connection with Mr. Cole's letters and' 
other letters which are in my possession," that I had a while ago and 
through inadvertence I did not use; I got to tallring about some 
other things. They are now in the hands of the reporter. She 
said, "All right; I wall wa-ite a letter to you stating the facts." She 
said. "I do not know how much to write." I said, "Simply write 
the facts." She said. " I feel like I should write you something in 
connection with what transpired in Judge Watkins's office when this 
money was paid — this last $50, which was paid just a few^ days ago." 
It was within the last three weeks that we had this conversation. I 
said, " What transpired ? " She said. " Judge Watkins called a halt 



FUR SEAL INVESTIUATIOX IX ALASKA. 79 

on Mr. Rothermel f5r reprehensible conduct in his office. He said, 
• That does not go in my office.' " I said, " I do not care anything 
about what occurred between Judge Rothermel and Judge Watkins. 
Just simply state in 3'our letter that circumstance under which this 
$50 was paid and how it came to be paid since you returned to 
AVashington this last time, when it has been due more than a year." 
She said she would write me a letter, which modifies the letter I 
read this morning with respect to the antedated receipt — the so- 
called antedated receipt — and gives Miss Kirby's statement. I said, 
" Miss Kirby, I will read Mr. Cole's letter to the House, then I will 
follow it with your letter, with my statement of what you have said 
to me, which was not that it Avas antedated, but that it did not state 
the truth, and that there was the money for you and you refused to 
take it because he wanted you to sign the kind of a receipt which 
you stated to me was not the truth.'' 

So I have that letter and will read it now if you want me to. I 
would have read it this morning had it not been that 1 had left it in 
ni}^ office. I stated to the committee this morning that I would be 
glad to put it in the record later. 

Mr. Stephens. Mr. Watkins, we will be glad to hear from you 
now. 

Mr. Watkins. Mr. Chairman and gentlemen of the committee, I 
will state that when the allowance of Miss Kirby was before the 
House for consideration I made a statement with reference to the 
work that she had done for the Committee on Expenditures in the De- 
partment of Commerce, and in connection with that statement it 
was shown that it was part of a payment due to her by Mr. Rother- 
mel for the private and individual personal work outside of the 
committee work that she had done, and there was an amount due 
which had not been paid to her. She married and went off to Iowa 
a short time after she received the amount from the House which was 
allowed her for the work which she had done for several months, 
and upon her return here to Washington I saw her some time during 
the month of January and told her the facts, that it was claimed 
that the receipt which Mr. Rothermel had presented to her on April 
23 was dated back and that that was the reason she had not accepted 
the pajanent. She at once, with a great deal of vehemence, denied 
that the receipt was dated back, and stated the reason why at that 
time she did not feel disposed to sign the receipt for $50 and dis- 
avowed the fact that it was dated back. 

Mr. Stephens. Judge Watkins, what was her reason for refusing 
to sign the receipt? 

Mr. Watkins. This was a private matter between her and Mr. 
Rothermel. Mr. Rothermel made a- remark to her, she said in the 
presence of Mr. Rothermel and myself — made a remark to her at the 
time when he wanted her to sign the receipt which she considered 
was offensive, and in her petulance, becoming offended on account 
of Mr. Rothermel's remark to her in connection with the trans- 
action which had happened in the office and in the House, she be- 
came offended and threw the receipt down and refused to sign it, 
and walked out of the office. The remark which was made I hardly 
think would be proper to repeat here. 

Mr. Stephens. We are not asking for that. 



80 FUR SEAL INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA. 

Mr. Wa'J'kins. It was a personal matter between her and Mr. 
Rothermel. 

Mr. Stephens. I could not understand whv she would not accept 
tlie $50 due her. 

Mr. Watkins. The fact is. Mr. Rothermel was not here when the 
question Avas brought up in the House. He was engaged in the cam- 
paign in Pennsylvania, and Mr. Rothermel resented the fact that that 
was brought up in his absence, and they had quite a controversy 
about that matter, and Miss Kirby was insisting on paj^ment because 
she gave me reasons why it was that she should be paid at that time. 
Mr. Stephens, the ranking Democratic member of the committee, 
and I took an active interest in seeing that Miss Kirby Avas paid what 
we found to be actually due her. There was a personal feeling be- 
tween her and Mr. Rothermel, largely growing out of that incident 
of the fact that it was taken up in his absence, and he was not given 
a proper op])ortunity of presenting his view of the matter, and the 
remark which Mr. Rothermel made was calculated to offend the lady, 
and she took offense at it, and at once left the office. 

He presented her tliis pencil-written receipt, which is net signed, 
and asked her in my presence whether that was the receipt which 
he offered to her to sign at the time. She said it looked like the 
receipt and she could not deny it: she did not say it was not the 
receipt, however, but that she did not absolutely remember it and 
she did not deny it. She was asked about the date of the receipt, 
and while she did not know the exact date, she did not deny the date 
of it at all. I told Miss Kirby that I thought it Avas my duty to let 
Mr. McGnire know the fact; that I had been informed that Mr. 
McGuire had a letter from Mr. Cole, and it would be an injustice to 
Mr. Rothermel to have a statement of that kind made on the floor 
of the House if it was not true, and so I called Mr. McGnire np over 
the telephone first, and told him the fact, that it was a mistake about 
the receipt not being dated; that is, it was a mistake that the re- 
ceipt was dated back; and she then said she Avrote him a letter, and 
afterw^ards told me she had Avritten a letter to that effect, that it 
was not on account of not receiving money, but it was another matter, 
and the receipt was not dated back. Perhaps the members of the 
committee would not understand the full value of that at first, but if 
a receipt had been presented to her. dated back, it Avould have con- 
tradicted Avhat Miss Kirby had said before the Committee on Ac- 
counts, and it Avould also have contradicted the statements which 
her friends had made on the floor of the House, and it was important 
to knoAv Avhether a receipt was offered to her, dated back, because it 
Avould have contradicted absolutely some of the statements which 
she had made. 

I understand, Mr. Chairman, that the object of this inquiry is to 
ascertain Avhat compensation Dr. Elliott and Mr. Gallagher are en- 
titled to. If that is the object of it. I Avill be glad of the opportunity 
to make a statement Avith reference to that. 

Mr. Stephens. We Avill be glad to hear from you on that point. 

Mr. Watktns. So far as I understand it. that is the only question 
before the committee for inquiry now. 

Mr. Stephens. We haA^e strayed off considerably, but that is the 
matter aa'c want to hear from you about now. 



FUR SEAL INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA. 81 

Mr. Watkins. So far as I recall, the first meeting of the committee 
which I ever attended was the meeting of the committee at which it 
was decided by the committee that it was necessary at once to send 
some one or some persons, one or more, to the seal islands for the 
purpose of making investigation to determine whether or not the 
(xovernment had been robbed of a large amount of money, growing out 
of the seal industry under the contracts which were made with vari- 
ous parties. We examined the law and we found that tlie com- 
mittee did have authority to make the investigation, and at that 
session of the committee, acting hurriedly, as we were compelled to 
do on account of the season advancing, and on account of the fact that 
we did not want the parties at interest to knoAv this investigation was 
going to be made, we agreed that Dr. Elliott and Mr. Gallagher 
woidd be sent there for the purpose of making this investigation. 
They came back with their partial report and facts which they had 
acquired during their stay in the island. Mr. Elliott began at once 
to make a compilation of the various reports which had been made 
on this subject for a number of years, and day in and day out and 
night after night, and even Sundays. Mr. Elliott was constantly at 
work for a good mam^ months. 

I was in very close touch with the work because of the fact that 
Mr. Rothermel was at home a great part of the time, he having 
quite vigorous opposition, and Mr. Stephens was also away, and I 
Avas the next ranking Democrat on the committee, and on that ac- 
count I was in very close touch with the work Avhich was going 
on in the office. I will say for Mr. Elliott that I never saw a per- 
son more laborious, more faithful, more diligent, and who had ac- 
(|uired a more vast amount of information on the subject than he had 
on this subject of the seal industry. He was indefatigable in his 
labor and rendered such service as is almost indispensable in connec- 
tion with the digging up and developing of facts in connection 
wth the depredations which had been made upon the seals, the vio- 
lations of the contracts on the part of those who made the contracts 
with the Government, resulting, I believe, in the saving of several 
million dollars to the Government on account of the work which 
he was able, through his expert knowledge and through his arduous 
labors, to present first to the House of Representatives and then 
to the Department of Justice. 

As to Mr. Gallagher, I simply know he was sent there. I do not 
know the extent of his work, but I do know that with reference to the 
situation as to Elliott, his labors were very incessant, his work was 
very effective. I do not believe there is a man living who could 
have furnished the information that he furnished on that subject. 

Mr. Stephens. Do vou care to sav anvthing further. Judge AVat- 
kins? 

Mr. Watkins. No; I simply wanted to let the committee know 
what work he had done, and how valuable his services had been. 

Mr. Scott. You say you examined the law and ascertained the 
committee had authority to make this investigation ? 

Mr. Watkins. Yes. 

Mr. Scott. To what law do you refer, Mr. Watkins ? 

Mr. Watkins. The law was collated in Hinds' Precedents, 
though T believe we also examined the statute from which the law 
44682—16 6 



82 FUR SKA I. IXVKSTKJATIOX IX ALASKA. 

was taken aiul also the rules of the House. Hinds' Precedents and 
the rules of the House were the ones we had immediately before 
us, hut those Precedents referred to the law which was on the 
statute I'ooks. I do not have before me — in fact I did not know 
the connnittee was making an investigation until Mr. Rothermel 
came around to my office a short time ago and told me an investi- 
gation was being made, and I learned afterwards that word had 
been left there for me. but I did not know an investigation was 
l)eing made until just a moment before I came in here. 

ISIr. Scott. Do you mean there is any law extent which empowers 
this Committee on Expenditures in the Department of Commerce 
to incur expenses without the action of Congress^ 

Mr. Watktxs. To make the investigation would necessarily carry 
with it the incurring of expenses. They are authorized to make in- 
vestigations in connection with committee work, and that Avould 
necessarily, as I understand it. carry Avith it the incurring of ex- 
penses. I do not understand it has the right to designate the amount 
which is to be paid. If the committee had been authorized to do 
that, it would not have come to this committee. Onr understand- 
ing was that the Committee on Accounts was the proper committee 
to refer the matter to on the (juestion of what the amount of the 
expenditures should be. AVe could not have told at that time what 
the expenditures Avould be. My understanding of the law is that 
the law authorizes and the rules of the House also authorize the 
investigations which were made, which would necessarily carry with 
it the incurring of expenses. 

Mr. Scott. To what particular rules do you refer? 

Mr. "Watkixs. I am very sorry I have not got them before me. 
but I suppose Mr. Elliott has. 

Mr. Elliott. It is in my papers if you want it. It makes it a 
very imperative duty as to the nine conunittees of the House, the 
standing rules of the House. 

Mr. Watkins. I am reading now from the Congressional Eecord. 
in which at that time, in the discussion of this matter of Mr. Elliott's 
account, I referred to these rules. I there said : 

I read from Hinds' Precedents, volume 4, page 831, section 431G. whicli says: 
" The several committees on expenditures in the departments of the Govern- 
ment, heing charged hy the rules with the duty of making investigations, have 
assumed the right to do so without further specilic direction of the House." 

That is a question from Hinds' Precedents. 

Mr. Elliott. Here [indicating] is the standing rule which gives 
the order to do it. 

Mr. Watkixs. I will read from the rule of the House, which was 
also referred to. 

Standing rules and orders of the House : 
It shall be the duty of said committees 

Mr. Stephens. What rule is that? 

Mr. Watkins. That is referring to the Committees on Expendi- 
tures. It is the law from the Forty-fourth Congress, first session : 

It shall be the duty of the said committees — 

that is, the Committees on Expenditures — 

to examine and inquire and report v.'hether any and what abuses at any time 
exists in the failure To enforce the payment of moneys which may be due to 
the United States from public defaulters and others. 



FUR SEAL INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA. 83 

I understand the object, of this investigation was to prove that 
ver}^ thing- — to show there had been defalcation on the part of those 
Avho had made contracts Avith the Government in connection with 
the seal-fur industry. That rule covers that matter. 

Mr. Scott. It was the opinion of the committee from that rule 
and the citation from Hinds' Precedents which you have just read 
that that committee would have authority to employ special agents 
to make this investigation and incur expenses? 

Mr. Watkixs. Certainly. The rule there cites the legislative acts 
on that subject. It would be perfectly useless to have a rule allow- 
ing investigations to be made unless there was going to be some 
compensation to those who were making the investigation. 

Mr. Scott. I presume that allowance could be made by resolution 
of the House. I just wanted to get the idea of the committee and 
the authority upon which they haci assumed to act. 

Mr. Watkixs. That rule quoting the law on the subject, I think, 
would cover the case thoroughly. AVe thought so at the time. The 
fact they did the work was sufficient. 

Mr. Scott. You say that Mr. Elliott obtained very valuable infor- 
mation on this trip. What facts did you understand that he ob- 
tained while in Alaska ? 

Mr. Watkins. I do not base my statements on the value of his 
services on the fact that he simply went there and made an investiga- 
tion of the physical facts which then existed and stopped right there ; 
but on that one point I will say, that in going there he found out the 
manner in which the fur-seal industry was being conducted and the 
dei)redations which were being made, by interrogating the inhabit- 
ants and citizens there — the people who lived on the island — and he 
also reported back, and his report shows the weight of the skins ; that 
he made investigations to determine at what age the animals were 
killed that bore that kind of skin — that size and weight of skin — and 
he did make very valuable suggestions in his rejDorts which enabled 
us then to take these various reports which had been made from the 
departments — to the committees and to the House and Senate pre- 
viously — and show what the depredations amounted to. It was alto- 
gether his Avork, and not simply going up there and coming back. It 
was this laborious work which he did, covering several months' time. 

Mr. Scott. It was after he returned and made his original report? 

Mr. Watkins. He was in the office of the committee from da_y to 
day and even late at night, and nearly alw^ays on Sunday, working 
and collating the facts as shown by the various reports which had 
been made previously, and also furnishing us with the law upon the 
subject, and even going so far as to give us the price current for the 
sale of these skins in England. 

Mr. Scott. That information was gathered from other hearings 
and documents and various sources here in Washington? 

Mr. Watkins. Yes, sir ; vast volumes of documents. 

Mr. Scott. In that respect he was acting as the employee of the 
committee ? 

Mr. Watkins. Yes, sir; he was acting under the authority with 
which we vested him in making the investigation and obtaining the 
facts that would enable us to make a report as the basis of the recov- 
ery for the Government of the amount that was involved. 



84 FUR SEAL INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA. 

Mr. tScoTT. Do you know whether this uiatter had been brought to 
the attention of other departments of the Government before the 
agents of this committee were sent to Alaska ? 

Mr. Watkins. I have been informed that (huinii; the former 
regime attention hud been called to tlie depredations, but I have 
never been informed of any thorough and efficient investigation 
having been made, such as to operate as a basis for recovery. 

Mr. Scott. In these investigations which it was proposed were to 
be made by Mr. Elliott, had that matter been brought to the attention 
of the Department of Justice and any consultation had before he was 
sent ? 

Mr. Watkins. Do you mean whether the Department of Justice 
or any other department of the Government had sanctioned the send- 
ing of Mr. Elliott and Mr. Gallagher up there ^ 

Mr. Scott. Yes; or was cognizant of their going at the time i 

Mr. Watkins. I am not sure about that. I will not say definitely 
about that, because what I have is what has been stated since they 
went up there. I do not know that .1 heard that stated before they 
went up there. It was probably discussed before the committee at 
that time, but I can not state definitely. 

Mr. Scott. I ask that because Mr. Elliott stated yesterday that the 
purpose of this investigation by your committee was to obtain infor- 
mation for the Department of Justice. 

Mr. Watkins. There is no doubt about it being for the benefit of 
the Government — to get information that Avould operate as a basis 
for judicial action, either civil or criminal. That was the object of 
it, but I can not recall right now whether it was before thej^ went, 
whether it was requested by any department of the Government. 

Mr. Stephens. I will read wdiat the rule of the House says in re- 
gard to the authority of these committees. This has direct reference 
to the jurisdiction of the various committees, beginning with the very 
first and going through the entire list. 

Expenditures in the several departments. 

There are 10 committees on expenditures in the various departments of the 
Government, etc. — 

Whose duties are — 

Tlie examination of tlie accounts and expenditures of the several departments 
of the Government and the manner of keeping the same ; the economy, justness, 
and correctness of sucli expenditures ; their conformity with appropriation 
laws ; the proper application of public moneys ; the security of the Government 
against unjust and extravagant demands ; retrenchment ; the enforcement of 
the payment of moneys due to the United States ; the economy and account- 
ability of public officers, etc. 

I do not see anything here that would grant authority for an 
investigation of this kind unless it be this particular matter, "econ- 
omy and accountability of public officers." 

Mr. Elliott. Yes; and also the moneys that the Government is 
being robbed of. 

Mr. Stephens. " The proper application of public money." 

Mr. Elliott. And doesn't it speak of abuses? 

Mr. Stephens. " The security of the Government against unjust 
and extravagant demands." That Avould not apply. 

Retrenchment and enforcement of payment of money due to the United States. 



FUR SEAL INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA. 85 

Mr. Elliott. This money is due, which these people robbed the 
Government of. 

Mr. Scott. But there are other committees. The question is. to 
what committees would that apph^? 

Mr. Stephens. It says they shall all be subject within the juris- 
diction of the nine departments as follows, and then names the 
Department of State, the Department of Commerce and Labor, etc. 

Mr. Elliott. And these seals come under the Department of Com- 
merce. That is the very point — to compel the return of the moneys 
the Government has been robbed of. 

Mr. Watkins. If there is nothing further, Mr. Chairman, I will 
ask to be excused. 

Mr. Stephens. Very well, Mr. Watkins. 

Do you want to make a statement, Mr. Rothermel, or have you 
said all you care to ? 

TESTIMONY OF HON. JOHN H. ROTHERMEL, A FORMER REPRE^ 
SENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF PENNSYL- 
VANIA. 

Mr. Rothermel. I simply w^ant to state that Mr. Cole came to the 
office and asked for employment when Miss Kirby left, I told him 
distinctly and clearly that if he would want to work for $12.50 a 
week he could do it; that somebody else was the clerk of the com- 
mittee and I expected him back, and that is the understanding there 
was about it. He has never mentioned it until he made these attacks 
on me, and now says that I owe him $125 a month, and we never 
spoke about it in our lives. 

Mr. Scott. Your understanding was that the $50 a month was 
the entire compensation which he was to receive for all his services? 

Mr. Rothermel. He had been working for Congressman Lewis 
here, and I expected he was getting compensation from him, and 
that was our understanding, and I told him that as soon as Baker 
came back that would end him. 

Mr. Scott. But j^our understanding then w^ith him was that the $50 
a month which you were to pay him was to be in full of all com- 
pensation for services performed for you as your secretary, and also 
all services performed by him in connection with the clerkship of 
the committee? « 

Mr. Rothermel. We did not make any specific contract about 
that. I told him that was what he could get. 

Mr. Scott. Was that your understanding? 

Mr. Rothermel. Yes; absolutely. 

IMr. Scott. That $50 a month was to cover every part of his service 
performed for you personally and for the committee ? 

Mr. Rother:mel. AVhatever work was to be done in the office. The 
fact is the committee had hardly anything to do then any more. 
"Wlien we had hearings we had no clerk to the committee. That was 
during the summer, because we did not get any clerks to these com- 
mittees until December, and the Avork of the committee was really 
practically over. 

Mr. Scott. When did Mr. Cole begin work for you ? 

Mr. Rothermel. I think it was aliout the 1st of Mav. 



86 FUR SEAL IXVKSTKiATTOX IX ALASKA. 

Mr. Scott. What year? 

Mr. ROTHKRMEL. 1914. 

Mr. Scott. That was after Miss KirW.v had left? 

^Iv. IJoTiiKHMFx. Yt's. She left m Api-il. and there was absohitely 
no other understanding- ahout it. lie makes demands here for money 
on evei-ybody and wants it from me and wants it from Mr. Elliott. 

Mr. Scott. AVe have gone into some matters here that seem, of 
course, rather far-fetched, but they are here, and as long as they are 
here I want to get the right unilerstanding and not the wrong under- 
standing. This man Baker's name has been mentioned. When did 
he first become clerk of this committee ? 

Mr. RoTiiKiiAJEL. In December. 

:Mr. Scott. What year? 

Mr. RoTHKRMEL. 191, 3. 

Mr. ScoTT. When did he cease to be clerk of the committee ? 

^Ir. KoTHERMEL. I kept him on the roll until this other matter 
came up in the House about the Kirby business. 

Mr. Scott. Until what time was that? 

Mr. RoTHER.MEL. That was until the 18th of April. On the 28d 1 
answered those charges over there, and then I told them in the House 
that jMr. Baker had been away and that as soon as he came back he 
could have his place, and I told ]Mr. Cole so when he came there. 

Mr. ScoTT. When was he taken oif the roll ( 

Mr. RoTHERMEL. He was on the roll. 

Mr. Scott. When was he taken off? 

Mr. RoTiiERMEL. I divided the checks between him and Cole. 

Mr. StoTT. When was Baker taken olf the roll ( 

Mr. RoTHERMEL. He drew his last check in November, 191-1:. 

Mr. Scott. AVas he taken olf the roll at that time? 

Mr. RoTHERMEL. Yes. Congress adjourned then. 

Mr. Scott. Was Baker present at any time that he was on the 
roll and did he perform any service here in AVashington ( 

Mr. RoTHERMEL. Oh, yes. 

Mr. Scott. How long^ 

Mr. RoTHERMEL. I Can not tell you about that, but he was here 
and drew his checks. I want to say this also: I have allowed him 
latitude then when he was ill. He went out and saw his sister. 
Every day in the year when he was done here in the folding room 
he stopped and helped me without^ any compensation at all. 

Mr. Scott. He worked in the folding room before he became clerk 
of the committee? 

Mr. RoTHERMEL. Ycs. There was no com})ensation for him. and 
he was at my office every day and helped me. 

Mr. Scott. AVhen did he go back to Ohio and leave AVashington 
with respect to the time he was first enrolled as connnittee clerk? 

Mr. RoTHERMEL. I really can not tell you that without. i)robably, 
looking into some memoranda. 

Mr. Scott. AA^as it just a few days or a few weeks? 

Mr. RoTHERMEL. You mean after he Avas made clerk? 

Mr. Scott. After he became enrolled as clerk of the committee? 

Mr. RoTHERMEL. I tliiuk he went away after he had l)een there 
about three'months. He went away to see his sister and became ill. 

^Ir. Scott. Did he ever afterwards return and perform any 
services ? 



FUR SEAL INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA. 87 

Mr. RoTHEiniEL. Oh. yes: he was here afterAvards. 

Mr. Scott. To perform services? 

Mr. EoTHERMEL. He was about and helped whenever he was here. 

Mr. Scott. When was that? 

Mr. Rothermel. After he came back. 

Mr. Scott. When? 

Mr. EoTHERMFX. I just Said about three UKmtiis or so after lie was 
designated as clerk. 

Mr. Scott. I understood you to say he left here and went back 
to Ohio about three months after he was designated as clerk. 

Mr. EoTHERMEL. No ; he went out on a visit and became ill. 

Mr. Scott. Then he went out on a visit innnediately after he was 
designated as clerk? 

Mr. RoTHER3iEL. No : I just said about two or three months after 
he was designated as clerk. 

Mr. Scott. Then he came back how long after that? 

Mr. Rother:hel. I think he Avas here in June — May and June — 
and I got along Avith these two felloAvs and had told them what 
they Avere to do. 

Mr. Scott. This matter Avas up in the House in May, Avas it not? 

Mr. Rothermel. Xo: that Avas in April. I Avish to state this, 
that these tAvo men have all the money of the secretary of the com- 
mittee. 

Mr. Scott. What two men ? 

Mr. RoTiiicRMEL. Cole and Baker. They ti'ied to make it ap- 
pear 

Mr. Scott (interposing). Has Cole received more than the three 
months which he enumerated this forenoon ? 

Mr. Rothermel. Cole received $50 a nu)nth Avhen Baker could not 
come. I told him that we Avould have to get Baker's receipt. I told 
him to go over to the disbursing office and find out Avhat was re- 
quired; otherwise it Avould have to be sent on to Baker if he did not 
come. He Avent over and told me that they told him in the office 
that if Baker's receipts Avere filed, then they Avould pay him the 
money. Every first of the month he had it ready and Avent and got 
the money and kept his $50 that I had promised to pay him out of it. 
He had the money in his possession. 

Mr. Scott. Did you liaA-e another clerk in your office during the 
past summer, when Cole Avas with you. Avho acted as your secretary ? 

Mr. Rother.aiel. I do not knoAv that he acted as my secretary. 

^Ir. Scott. I am getting confused in this matter, there are so many 
of them. 

Mr. Ro'rHER.AiEL. I wish you Avould let me finish the other proposi- 
ti(m I Avas on. Then he Avent to the disbursing office and took Baker's 
receipt and they told him. so he told me. that they Avould pay him 
the money if Baker's receipts AAere filed. Then when September came 
and he asked me to loan him $'25 for his family Avhen he Avent to 
AllentoAvn. He Avent to the Clerk of the House and persuaded him 
to give him the October check for $125, and he kept the $25 and the 
$125 and concealed it from me until I requested him tAvice to go and 
get Baker's check. 

Mr. Scott. And all that money 

Mr. Rothermel (interrupting). One moment; you asked hoAv 
much he received. May. $50: June. $50: July. $50; Augu.st, $50; 



»» FUR SKAL INVE.STKiATION IX ALASKA. 

Septeniher, $.")0: and the ^1'2') that he took for October. How much 
does that make ( 

Mr. McCtuike. $37r). 

Mr. RoTHEHMEL. And the ^$'2^) he borrowed h-v.m me at the Cochran 
Hotel for his family. 

Mr. Scott. That'is $400^ 

Mr. RoTHEHMEL. Yes. 

Mr. Scott. Commencino- with April? 

Mr. RoTiiEiniEL. Yes. 

Mr. Watkins. Not the 1st of April. 

Mr. ELmoTT, Miss Kirby was paid up to the end of April. 

Mr. Scott. Baker received how much a month during that time? 

Mr. RoTHEK]N[EL. Baker received the difference in the checks. 

Mr. Scott. Between what Cole got and the total check? 

Mr. ROTHERMEL. YcS. 

Mr. Scott. That would be the check that went to the clerk of the 
committee that you refer to? 

Mr. RoTHERMEL. Yes. 

Mr. Scott. The check that went to your private secretary — you had 
another secretary that leceived that? 

Mr. Rotiiermel. Oh. yes: Miss Young is my secretary at home. 
She takes care of the offices at home. 

Mr. Scott. So vour secretary at your home in Pennsylvania drew 
the $125 a month? 

Mr. Rothermel. Yes. 

Mr. Scott. She has drawn that during all this period? 

Mr. RoTHERiMEi.. Yes: she has been my secretar}^ ever since I have 
been in Congress. I ought to say this, that Miss Kirby drew $50 
and that was taken out of Miss Young's check. 

Mr. Scott. But after Miss Kirbv left, Miss Young drew the whole 
$125? 

Mr. Rothermel. Yes. 

Mr. Scott. But she never performed any services here in AVash- 
ington ? 

Mr. Ro'i'HEKMEL. She was here occasionally, but she takes care 
of the offices at home. I have more work over there almost than 
in Washington. I haye a statement somewhere, and I really do 
not have it with my paj^ers here, but it is in my office, where I 
could give you the details about the money that was paid out, and 
I want to say in this connection that I haye a son and I have two 
brothers that could ha^e done this work better than Cole did and 
also the secretar3^ but I never took on any of the relatives, and 
they were constantly on my heels for jobs, and I divided these 
checks somewhat as a matter of charity and to do effectual work. 

Mr. McGriRE. Mr. Chairman. I am feeling so badly that I believe 
I will have to go to my office. I did not want to read this letter 
into the record. I spoke about it this morning. 

Mr. Stephens. You may do that now. 

Mr. McGuire (reading) : 

2G06 I Street NW.. 
Was}iiii(/ioii. }). C, Fehrnary 2, 1915. 
Hon. RiRu S. McGuiKE, 

Houite of Rcf)rcs<]it(ftircs. \Vii.Hhiii(it(»i. 1). ('. 

Dear Mr. ^NFcCUire: In regard to ihe request you made of me by telephone 
some days airo that 1 verify certain statements in the letter referred to by 
you — 



FUR SEAL INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA. 89 

I made no request by telephone, but the young hidy called nie. 
She had heard certain something about it. and I presume from what 
Judge A^^atkins states that there had been something said about it. 

I wish to say that I can not verify tlie statements contained in tlie letter to 
the effect that Mr. Rolierinel wished me to sign a receii)t (hited six weelcs 
back. In fact. I wisli tf) deny that statement, and in regartl tliereto I submit 
the following : 

The writer of the letter in question, Mr. Charles L. Cole, telephoned me 
the latter part of October, 1914, asking to see me aljout a matter which he 
said concerned me vitally. More than surprised, I asked the nature of the 
matter. He did not wish to discuss it over the telephone, but could he see 
me? Yes; he could. Where? At my home. He came to my house one day 
after noon, in late October, and among a nuize of comments upon Mr. Koth- 
ermel's affairs, he asked me if Mr. llothermel had not demanded that I sign 
a receipt that was antedated. I replied quite positively in the negative. The 
gentleman then said to me, "Oh, I thought he did." I said, ■"No: Mr. Roth- 
ermel desired that I sign a single " — 

Here she seems to give the reason for not signing the receipt. 

" Mr. Ilothermel desired that I sign a single receipt covering the entire time 
during which he had employed me." But I wished to sign a separate re- 
ceipt for each separate payment which he made to me, and include in each 
such receipt the date upon which the money was due as well as the date 
upon which the money was paid, so that those receipts would bear out ;my 
statement regarding the inconvenience that I had experienced in receivhig the 
payments in question. The mildest thing I can say is that Mi'. Cole has very 
radically misunderstood me. 

Another statement made in the letter in question leaves the impression that 
Mr. Rothermel still owes me *50. This A\as entirely correct ,it the ti)ne the 
letter in question was written, but to avoid any further misunderstanding I 
wish to state that on Satui-day. January 30, 1915, Mr. Ilothermel paid me that 
amount in the presence of Judge Watkins, ot Louisiana. I'pon the advice of 
Judge Watkins I signed a receipt, which, though not entirely to my liking. Mr. 
Rothermel seemed anvious to have, and he said, among otiier things, that he 
had been at a grave disadvantage by not having the receipt long ago. In (con- 
nection with the signing of this receipt, Mr. Rothermel evinced some annoy- 
ance with me because, as he said, I had made the statement that he had de- 
manded my signature to a receipt which he has antedated, and he gave as his 
authority for the assertion the name of the gentleman who has written the 
same thing to you. My reply to Mr. Rothermel was to the effect that the same 
gentlemen had not only said it, but had written it. I did not. however, indi- 
cate that you were my authority for it. 

Mr. Rothermel also desired that I append to this receipt a statement to the 
effect that there had never been any difference between us in regard to money. 
I refused, as I could not in honesty do this. He expresse<l the fear that I 
would show the receipt, and therefore refused to allow me to make a copy for 
myself— a copy of the receipt. 

I doubt the wisdom of dwelling at any further length upon this uni)leasant 
topic, but I do wish to reiterate that the statement that Mr. Rothermel wislied 
me to sign an antedated receipt is not true, and that while my interview with 
Mr. Rothermel last Saturday was at intervals other than serene. Mr. Rothermel 
did pay me in full. 

I regret indeed that any conflict has arisen, but I thank you very much for 
having acquainted me with these facts and for the opportunity to make a 
Irue statement regarding the same. 
I am. very respectfully, 

Katharine Kikby llrMMKi.. 

Mr. Watkins. She has subsequenth' married a gentleman by the 
name of Hummel. Subsequent to the time this first receipt was of- 
fered her to be signed she married a man by the name of Hummel 
and now lives in Iowa. 

Mr. McGuiRE. That is my imderstanding. 

There has been something said about franked envelopes. This 
document [indicating] with these drawings and these clippings and 



90 FUR SEAL INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA. 

comments thereon and various other articles and interlineations and 
clipi^ings, one paragraph hei-e and at some other point another i^ara- 
graph, brought in such form as to indicate it was continuous reading, 
with this letter [indicating] was handed to me by Dr. Everman. 
Whether this went through the uiails, I do not know. It came to me 
in that form, addressed in Mr. Elliott's handwriting, to Dr. Chester 
H. Stiles, Board of Public Health, Washington, D. C. 

Mr. Stephens. Is it postmarked or not? 

Mr. McCjuire. There is no postmark on it. Tliis was handed to me 
b}' Dr. EAerman. These other documents which I exhibit here tf) 
the committee, with clippings and, in the handwriting of Mr. Elliott, 
connnents on the clippings, pictures seemingly clipped from papers. 
])eriodicals, or something, and all sorts of comments, were also 
handed me by Dr. I-Cverman, haA'ing been sent him, some of them 
by Dr. David Starr Jordan, and others with the statements that they 
have been inclosed to them under frank. That is in Mr. Elliott's 
handwriting. I know his Avork and his handAvriting. 

Mr. Ellioit^. 1 do not deny sending them out or handing them 
under frank, but not through the mails unless stamped. 

Mr. McGuiRE. Some time ago I received a letter from Mr. Ferris 
and a few others, commenting about the abuse of the franking privi- 
lege, and I told my secretary to save them, but the only things I 
could find are these, left with me by Dr. Everman. Mr. Ferris could 
tell you. and I can get the names of several other Members, if the 
committee desires them. 

I merely incidentally throw these things in for whatever they may 
be worth. 

Will the committee be kind enough to excuse me now ? 

Mr. Stephens. Certainly, Mr. McGuire. 

(Mr. McCjuire thereupon withdrew from the connnittee room.) 

Mr. Stephens. Is there anything further. Mr. Rothermel? 

Mr. Rother:mel. In this connection I Avant to make a statement 
about this Kirby business. I was away on the 18th of April when 
the Kirby resolution came up in the House. I had no knowledge of 
it, and do not attach any blame to anybody for having considered it. 
only the House was not in possession of the facts that I had paid 
Miss Kirby according to the contract Ave had. The records of the 
18th of April aa ill show it. and she had been paid seven months, and 
the eighth month had not been due then. The fact is. the month 
Avas up. I think, on the 21st of April, but I took her $50 out of the 
secretary's check and that Avas not payable until the end of the month. 
That Avas the contract. On the 23d of April I appeared before the 
House and then the truth came out, that that Avas all a mistake. It 
Avas not only an attack on me there Avithout my knowledge, but it 
Avas really untrue. When I came back to Washington, Cole came to 
see me and said what had happened in the House and came and 
said that Miss Kirby told him that that fact Avas not true, 
that I had paid her Avhat I agreed to pay. and he told me that 
he went and called Mr. Madden out and told him the thing Avas a 
mistake, and that Miss Kirby said it Avas, and they Avere sitting in 
the gallery together. 

Then, on the 23d. I took the floor and submitted the truth under 
the question of personal privilege, and then the whole thing came out 
that she had been paid. She told Lloyd so, and Lloyd stated it on 



FUR SKAL IXVKST1(;ATI0X IX ALASKA. 91 

the flooi- of the House. Eveiybodv knew the truth, and when I came 
over to the office then Miss Kirbv came in and was excited. She was 
sitting in the oaHery and perhaps she thought that I ^Yas severe; but 
I was not, to anybody in tlie Htnise, as the record will show, but she 
was somewhat flustered. She had carried my mail out of the office. 
We talked about that, and 1 sent for the money and offered her the 
money, but I did not Avant her to sign a general leceipt only for the 
last month, and wanted it "" Balance due for services '' from such and 
such dates. The lead-pencil memorandum there shows that. The 
idea was not that she should sign this lead-pencil note. I asked her 
to write it on the typewriter. I had just drawn that as a model, and 
that receipt says that it is balance in full for services from such and 
such date to the 21st of ApriL Then I said. '' You failed to sign the 
receipts and put them in the desk,'' as she did the first three, and I 
said, " You have your money: just sign the receipt and put it inside of 
my desk." 

Mv. Scott. That is the lilst of April of what year:? 

Mr. ROTHEHMEL. 1914. 

Mr. AVatkins. The 2-kl of April, because the receijjt is dated 
the 23d. 

Mr. EoTiiERMEL. When I appeared before the House: yes. But her 
month was up on the 21st of April. 

Mr. ScoTT. She quit you then? 

Mr, RoTHEKMEL. Yes. She wrote me a letter that I received at 
home a couple of days before. 

Mr. ScoTT. And you had been paying her $50 a month ? 

Mr. RoTHEUMEL. Ycs : according to the distinct understanding, the 
same as I had Avith Cole. 

Mr. Scott. You had been dividing the check between her and 
Baker before that? 

Mr. Elliott. Xo: Miss Young. 

Mr. RoTHEiniEL. Miss Young. We had no clerk to the committee 
until December. 

Mr. ScoTT. Between December and April you had been dividing 
the check between her and Baker ? Between December, when Baker 
was first enrolled, and April, when Miss Kirby left, you had been 
dividing the clerk's check between Bakei- and Miss Kirby? 

Ml'. RotherjNiel. Baker Avas here. 

Mr. Scott. From December to April ? 

Mr. RoTHEKMEL. Yes. He was here, I think it was, from Decem- 
ber to April. I really can not tell that exactly without my memo- 
randa. Baker was heie, and I think he was here until April or 
March, but I will not be certain of that, because I really do not recall 
it exactly. 

I was not ({uite through with that receipt business that happened 
in Judge AVatkins's office. ^liss Kirby walked out of the office and 
said that she made no claim to the money: that she did not like to 
sign that receij^t. and I said to her, I said, " You have received 
$1,200: I think you ought to send the money to ^Sliss Young." She 
said she made no claim to it, and she disappeared entirely. 

Mr. Scott, What money was that that should be sent to Miss 
Young ? 

Mr. Rothek:mel. The $.')0. 

]Mr. Scott. The $50 she had received? 



92 FUR. SKAI. INVKSTKiATIOX IN ALASKA, 

Mr. KoTiiERMKL. Yes. 1 said, "• In all fairness, 1 think Miss Young 
ought to have that money, because you drew $!;■)() a month from the 
House." Anyhow that was in the conversation. Then she walked 
out, and said she wished me all the good luck, and so on, and gave 
me the impression she would never come back for the money. Then 
I received a letter from her. Judge Watkins has the letter, asking 
whether I would not be willing to pay her the $50. I went to see 
Judge Watkins and asked whether he could not get her to the office 
and then we would straighten the thing up. Then we straightened 
it up, and cleared it up just as the receipt indicates here. 

I can not understand why that Kirby business shall be brought 
before this committee, when these men knew the truth. Cole knew 
it because Miss Kirby told him it was not right: he told me so. 
McGuire knows it: he heard it in the House. Cole knew it according 
to the Kirby letter that was read. McGuire knew it and he brings 
that letter in here and holds back the other one until he was pressed 
this afternoon. Why should this matter, about which I was libeled 
at home, be brought in here when they know the truth is different? 
That is the thing I can not understand, either on the part of — well, 
I do not expect much from Cole, but either on his part or on the part 
of McGuire. Why did McGuire bring Cole's letter in here after he 
was told that that was a mistake? I do not want to be condemned 
uy a lot of peojjle who do not care for the truth and who have black 
schemes in their hearts. I went through that, and I am going to 
finish this, and it will only take a minute. They took the record of 
April 18. and of the i23d, when I was in the House. They garbled 
it, they forged it under the laws of Pennsylvania, and they published 
it to make it appear that I had stolen this money. This man Cole 
saw it. and kncAv it, and told me how false and malicious and libelous 
it was. He knew all about it. and yet he writes McGuire a letter 
that I wanted the receipt dated back. What occasion would I have 
to date the receipt back when the money was due? What occasion 
would there be for me to do it ? How would it help my case ? The 
fact of the matter is I could have said to her. "' You will have to 
Avait until the secretary's check comes in.'' I paid her a week ahead 
of time according to contract. 

I have brought libel suits at home. 1 nuist get protection for my 
character somehow, and that men should come here and follow it up, 
when they know it is a lie. is beyond my understanding and compre- 
liension. 

There is Mr. Elliott. When this check transaction came up in 
the House Mr. Elliott Avas sitting there, and I said to Elliott. "Here 
is something that happened that is Avrong." I told Mr. Elliott that 
Cole had taken Baker's check and concealed it from me and Mr. 
Baker. He coaxed it out of the Clerk of the House. Then Elliott 
said. " Why, Cole, you made a mistake." He kept on talking and 
told him that he had no right to do it, but he had done it and he 
told us there that he needed the money for his family. Mr. Elliott 
Avill bear me out — ^at least he told me — that Cole demanded from him, 
and I think from (Jallagher, too, that I Avould be given a day's time 
to make him clerk of the committee — a threat — and if not he Avould 
do me harui. and instead of making him clerk of the committee I 
kicked him out. 



FUR SEAL IXVESTKJATION IX ALASKA. 93 

Mr. Stephens. Who told you that? 

Mr. EoTHERMEL. Mr. Ellliott told me that — that Cole told him 
that he would give me '24 hours' time to make him clerk of the com- 
mittee after he had stolen the check. 

Mr. Stephens. You mentioned Mr. (xallagher. Did you hear that, 
Mr. Oallagher? 

Mr. (tallaoher. No; he never made any such statement to me. 
Mr. Cole never made that statement to me. 

Mr. EoTHERMEL. Did he say anything to you about it ? 

Mr. Gallagher. No, sir. 

Mr. EoTHERMEL. Then I am mistaken about that. He said, " He 
dares go after me,'' after he had the $25 he borrowed from me and 
had $50 out of his monthly check, and then $125 check besides, and 
his wife writes me a letter that he had not paid her a cent. 

Mr. Stephens. How long did you keep Mr. Cole after this $125 
check incident? 

Mr. EoTHERMEL. Just Until the next day. 

Mr. Stephens. He left your employ, then, early in September? 

Mr. EoTHERMEL. Yes. 

Mr. Cole. No, sir; the 1st of October. 

Mr. EoTHERMEL. The 1st of October; yes. He took the October 
check in the disbursing office. The clerk gave it to him and he went 
to Allentown and signed Baker's name on it and passed it in the 
Lehigh Valley Trust Co., and from there it passed through the 
Philadelphia banks, and I did not find it out until the check was 
cashed. Under the Pennsylvania laws it is as clear a forgery as you 
can define for uttering a forged instrument under the law. 

Mr. Stephens. Eeference has been made to Mr. Baker and his 
absence from Washington, and some letters have been referred to. 
I note in one of these letters reference is made to the fact that you 
owe Baker a note. Did you owe Baker anything? 

Mr. EoTHERMEL. Mr. Chairman, let me tell you, I really would 
prefer to answer that in another way. These letters I never saw. 
They are either forgeries or they are stolen goods. I have never seen 
them until now. I do not owe Baker any money, and it would be 
ridiculous. Baker, as I think, received in the neighborhood of a 
thousand dollars, and Baker never had, perhaps, $100 to his name. 

Mr. Stephens. In one of the letters Baker wrote you that if you 
Avould let him have half of the clerk's salary that he would destroy 
the note or would not hold the note which you oAved him against 
you. To what does that refer? 

Mr. EoTHERMEL. I really do not know. I never saw it. Cole 
opened my mail and he took this out, and I do not know anything 
about it. I have been trying to get hold of these letters. He boasted 
about it or put it in the newspapers, and I do not know whether 
Baker w^rote that or not; but let me say this to you, Mr. Chairman, 
and I may make another statement in writing or in any way that the 
committee will see fit, but I do not like to answer here when I have 
not seen the letters, and I never wrote any letters to Baker about it. 

Mr. Stephens. You can see the photographic copies of the letters, 
if 3^ou care to. We have not the originals; they are with the De- 
partment of Justice, I understand. 

Mr. EoTHERMEL. Ask Cole whether he has the original. 



I 



94 FUR SEAL IXVESTICATION IX ALASKA. 

Mr. Stkimikns. Xo: I just stated they aiv with the Department of 
Justice. 

Mr. Cole. Tliat is where they are ; yes. 

Mr. Scott. That would not be at all material. As I understand. 
Mr. Rothermel says he did not owe Baker any money at all at that 
time. That was in March, 1914. 

Mr. RoTHKiniEL. Let me tell you. 

Mr. SciiTT. Is that correct? 

Mr. RoTiiKiLMEL. AMiat '. 

Mr. ScoTT. You .say at that time, at the time the letter i)uri)orts 
to have been written, in March. 1!)14, you did not owe Baker any 
money at all '. 

]Mr. lioTiiEiL^iEL. No; J did not, antl wliaL is more than that I 
ne\er saw these letters and never answered them. They were taken 
out of my office and opened, if they ever came there. 

1 was going to say something else there, IMr. Chairman, in answer 
to your (juestion. Baker, as I said before, worked for me nearly 
every day in the year when I was in Congress without any compensa- 
tion at all, and that was the re:is< n why 1 asked him to be the secre- 
tary or the clerk of the committee: and, besides, you can tr\ist him. 
and there has not been the slightest understanding of anything at all 
about paying oft' a note out of the clerk's salary. 

Mr. ScoTT. There was no note? 

Mr. ROTHEUMEL. Xo. 

Mr. Scott. I noticed in one of these letters, also, he mentions that 
he will send you a note. 

Mr. RoTiiEKMEL. I do not know anything aliout that. 

Mr. ScoTT. Or retmn you a note. 

Mr. Rotiiei!:mel. I I'eally do not know a thing about it. I did 
not see these letters at all. Here we are dealing with a man that 
opens the mail in a man's office — a confidential clerk. 

Mr. Scott. Where does this man Baker live? 

Mr. Rother:mel. Baker lives in Washington. 

Mr. Stepiie>\s. Is he here now ? 

Mr. Rothermel. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Scott. Do you know by whom he is emi)loyed now? 

Mr. Rothermel. Xo; I do not. lie has bought a small property 
here. 

Mr. Scott. Is he in the Government employ? 

Mr. Rotpiermel. No. 

Mr. Cole. I think Mr. Rotheimel ought to know. His wife is in 
his office. He ought to know where Baker is. 

Mr. Rothermel. I do not know where he lives. 

Mr. Scott. Do you know Baker ? 

Mr. Cole. I say his wife is in Mr. Rothermel's office. 

Mr. Scott. Baker's wife is in Mr. Rothermel's office? 

Mr. Cole. Yes: Mr. Rothermel and Mrs. Baker are together lots 
of times. 

Mr. Rothermel. 1 was asked where he lives. T do not know 
where he lives. I have not inquired about that at all. 

Baker received probably $1,000. How could he ever hold a note 
from me for such an amount of money? 

That is about all I have to say, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. Stephens. All right : that ends the matter'. 



FUR SEA!. INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA. 95 

FURTHEH TESTIMONY OF MR. CHARLES L. COLE. 

Mr, (\)LE. Mr. CMiairnian. I would like to make a further state- 
ment. 

Mr. Stephens. We will hear from you xery briefly. 

Mr. Cole. In the first place, Mr. Rothermel said he had no respect 
for anybod.y that did not answ^er the truth. Under the personal 
privilege he tried to explain this matter on the floor of the House, 
and he said this: 

On April 13, 1914, I rer-eived the tollowinf;- teleirrain : 

" Please wire at ni.v expense, as requested, if nothiuji hut clerkship can he 
landed for the present, as doctor sa.vs operation is necessjiry. nnd I prefer to 
be in Washington. 

" Joe Baker." 

I do not know what is wi-on,ii- with the .vouuf;- man, hut it is an official matter, 
and the work is done. I did a .srreat part of the work that the clerk ought 
to do, hut I did not mean to lay off .Toseph M. Raker simitly hecause he became 
ill, when he had asked leave of absence for 10 days on acc<tunt of his health. 

Mr. WooDKUFF. Yes ; but he had leave of absence extended to him for 10 
days, and he has been absent foi" four months. 

Mr. RoTHEKMEL. That is true, and I have explained it to the gentleman. 

He tried to state that Baker left Washington in April Avhen he 
left in January, 1914, and he was never in Washington since until 
June, when he came back about the Kirby matter. 

Mr. Rothermel. Mr. Baker asked about getting some other clerk- 
ship in the (xovernment. It was not this committee clerkship at all. 

Mr. Scott. Then is it your present recollection he did lea^"e in 
January? 

Mr. Rothermel. I really could not tell you that. I said so a while 
ago that I could not state definitely. I know he Avas here after- 
wards, but he became ill and I explained it to the House. 

Mr. Stephens. That seems to be all. 

Mr. Cole. I would like to state that after the Department of 
Justice made this investigation they sent an agent out to Ohio to 
interview Baker, and among other statements he made he said that 
he did hold a note against Rothermel and this is the way he Avas 
being paid off. Tiiose records are in the possession of the Depart- 
ment of Justice — I think, in Mi-. Bielaski's possession — and the De- 
partment of Justice has photographic copies of those letters, and I 
call the attention of the committee that this letter was dated March 
4, and came to Mr. Rothermel over two months before I came to him. 
. Mr. Rotheriniel. Let me see those letters. I never saw them. 

Mr. Cole. I Avill hand these photographic copies to the chairman. 

(Mr. Cole handed the papers to Mr. Stephens, who handed them 
to Mr. Rothermel. who examined them.) 

Mr. RoTHERAiEL. Mr. Chairman, this one states he wanded to make 
a proposition to me. There was not the slightest understanding on 
my part about an3i;hing. 

Mr. Scott. When did Mr. Patton come on this committee ? 

Mr. Rothermel. He was on for two terms. 

Mr. Elliott. Sixty-second and Sixty-third Congresses. 

Mr. Rothermel. He and McGuire were both on. 

Mr. Stephens. Baker said in this letter, " If you Avill let me have 
mv half of the clerk's check I Avill call oft' the note I hold.'' 



06 FUR SEAL INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA. 

Mr. KoTHERMEL. 1 (lo iiot know what he means about that. As 
long as he was not here this man had knowledge that the checks 
would be divided. There was not the slightest understanding at all. 
These letters I never saw. This letter was taken out of my office and 
opened. 

Mr. Stephens. I call your attention to the fact that this letter is; 
dated March 4. which was a couple of months before Mr, Cole began; 
work for 3'ou. 

iNIr. RoTiiERMEL. I did not get that letter. That was opened. 

Mr. Stephens. I believe this concludes the metter. The committer 
w^ill stand adjourned. 

(Thereupon, at 5.46 o'clock p. m., the committee adjourned.) 



MB -38. 












V^ s* v- % V j,0^ » " • 

C, vf 




V . » 




^ 
•^ 

'5'^ 



> ■a? -^ 







.0^,^. 
^ ^ 





<^^ ** 

% 




0' 




o 






'i7^. 



^'•" '^^^^<< 



0^ r:-j.^o. ,^^ .'_^"v ^^ 



.-^^ 



-^^^^ 



r '<^. 



.^ «" 



O. " O NO 



.^'^ » • o "^> ^^ c » * * ' C' 











> 



0^ r'L'.", ' 










'^--''^Af-^^ 









^. 







0^ 



V .. -^ 




i 






tlBRAIIV BINOINa 

■■■■ r r- 



ST. AUGUSTINE a> ' „ „ . ^<e> 



.0^ ..-/^ ^o 






^<y o " " * ■<* 



^>ffl^-'^ 



^ J" 



